Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,

I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed it
when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.

Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn if
Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
another issue.

I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving to
the Attic [1]. These note that

"In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC members"

(the minimum being three), and that electing willing community members
to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst comes
to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
a new or modified PMC".

Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
members joining the PMC.

What do you think?

Kind regards
Geoff

[1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic


On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26 contributors in
> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite growing
> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for jclouds-core
> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk and we
> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the project
> must move to the Apache attic.
>
> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>
> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the project.
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Alex Heneveld <al...@cloudsoft.io>]

As a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I'd be pleased to see jclouds
sustained a bit longer.

Increasingly in AB people are using custom containers (eg AWS CLI),
terraform, helm, and other tools to drive creation, but for well-behaved
VMs without much thought jclouds is usually simpler than any of those.  So
while the long-term future of jclouds in AB isn't clear to me, in the near
term it would be great to have maintenance support for jclouds at least, if
people are willing.  Thank you!

Re (2) I am definitely curious how much effort it would be for both
Brooklyn and jclouds to move to karaf5.  I think in both there's a lot of
subtle use of OSGi capabilities so they would be interesting exercises, and
if not too hard would be a great step forward for lightweightness.

Best
Alex


On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 04:53, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> thanks for your update !
>
> I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> 1. PMC set proposal
> 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf Minho
> here)
> 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> inform the board
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and
> joining
> > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> >
> > Regards
> > Juan
> >
> > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be
> helpful.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I’m in ;)
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to
> join
> > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if
> anybody
> > > is
> > > > > ok.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Francois
> > > > >
> > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had
> missed
> > > it
> > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I
> am
> > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for
> Brooklyn
> > > if
> > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on
> moving
> > > to
> > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic
> is
> > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > > members"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> > > members
> > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> > > comes
> > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it
> with
> > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within
> Jclouds
> > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing
> to
> > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options
> could be
> > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some
> community
> > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > contributors in
> > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> > > growing
> > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > > jclouds-core
> > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> > > and we
> > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> > > project
> > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project,
> e.g.,
> > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing
> list
> > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> anyone
> > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > > project.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --
> > > > > François
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juan Cabrerizo
> > Senior Software Engineer
> >
> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Alex Heneveld <al...@cloudsoft.io>]

As a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I'd be pleased to see jclouds
sustained a bit longer.

Increasingly in AB people are using custom containers (eg AWS CLI),
terraform, helm, and other tools to drive creation, but for well-behaved
VMs without much thought jclouds is usually simpler than any of those.  So
while the long-term future of jclouds in AB isn't clear to me, in the near
term it would be great to have maintenance support for jclouds at least, if
people are willing.  Thank you!

Re (2) I am definitely curious how much effort it would be for both
Brooklyn and jclouds to move to karaf5.  I think in both there's a lot of
subtle use of OSGi capabilities so they would be interesting exercises, and
if not too hard would be a great step forward for lightweightness.

Best
Alex


On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 04:53, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> thanks for your update !
>
> I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> 1. PMC set proposal
> 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf Minho
> here)
> 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> inform the board
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and
> joining
> > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> >
> > Regards
> > Juan
> >
> > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be
> helpful.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I’m in ;)
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to
> join
> > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if
> anybody
> > > is
> > > > > ok.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Francois
> > > > >
> > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had
> missed
> > > it
> > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I
> am
> > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for
> Brooklyn
> > > if
> > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on
> moving
> > > to
> > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic
> is
> > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > > members"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> > > members
> > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> > > comes
> > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it
> with
> > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within
> Jclouds
> > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing
> to
> > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options
> could be
> > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some
> community
> > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > contributors in
> > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> > > growing
> > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > > jclouds-core
> > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> > > and we
> > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> > > project
> > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project,
> e.g.,
> > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing
> list
> > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> anyone
> > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > > project.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --
> > > > > François
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juan Cabrerizo
> > Senior Software Engineer
> >
> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[John Calcote <jo...@gmail.com>]

I wish someone would just say what needs to be said and be done with it.
That is, the project requires maintenance and leadership and no one wants
to take on that responsibility. Andrew is unwilling to continue
(essentially) alone, and who could blame him for it? He's asked several
people over the last few years to commit to fixing one issue or another -
including myself - and (like myself) most of those he's asked have simply
not had the time or desire to contribute at that level. We all have
excuses, including, "my day job is already a full time effort" (whose job
is not a full time effort these days?)

I love open source - and I hate it. It requires passion and effort in a
world that's too busy to allow anyone that kind of time and energy. I,
myself, am the sole remaining contributor to and maintainer of an open
source project - OpenSLP - and even though the code base is found in every
printer firmware in the world, and installed, by default, on many Linux
distributions, not one of these many consumers is interested in
contributing to it. I have plenty of requests (for me) to make
modifications and fix bugs, but very few patch offerings. I'll admit, the
project has languished over the years because I'm tired of being a sole
proprietorship in a service designed to be run by a community.

Let's get our heads straight about this - if we don't want to give, then we
can't expect to get in this arena. We've had plenty of emails from other
project contributors indicating that they'd have to fork if jclouds move to
the attic. Well, if you have to fork, then you'd have to maintain. Why not
help maintain it over here instead of over there? I'm guessing it's because
you're hoping it won't come to that.

John

On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 7:16 AM Rich Bowen <rb...@apache.org> wrote:

> Thank you for providing this additional context, and for your patience
> with an outsider swooping in with solutions. :)
>
> I'll go read that thread and correct my misconceptions. It seems a great
> shame to have to either fork or reboot a project, when one is there, but I
> am glad to hear that you're already investigating options.
>
> --Rich
>
> On 2023/02/13 14:01:11 Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > FWIW, this is the complete discussion:
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/w61gzk2ohjtshbwcb5gy6wb2htv7fo0x
> >
> > It was actually cross-posted to the Brooklyn dev list [1] and some of
> > the PMC members there expressed their opinion.
> >
> > We are, however, somehow blocked by inaction and I honestly don't know
> > what would be the best way to move forward:
> >
> > On one hand, we'd love to have jclouds around and avoid moving it to the
> attic.
> > On the other hand, though, we feel we must be responsible to the
> > community and properly set expectations and reflect the project
> > reality, retiring it if there is no real energy/time to continue it.
> > This thread is several months old now, and nothing has changed. We did
> > several calls to action with concrete requests for help, but no
> > further engagement happened.
> >
> > I know we all have the best intentions here when willing to keep
> > jclouds alive, but after several failed requests for help to those
> > that want to keep the project alive, and several months of waiting and
> > going in circles...
> > Are we doing the right thing for the community by changing the current
> > jclouds project PMC with another inactive PMC? (And if anyone thinks
> > the new PMC wouldn't be inactive... why has no one taken any action in
> > all these months?).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > My 0.02$
> >
> > I.
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/6o20d0w1f1xroyo4vv33hlvyb1lk4ndd
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 2:54 PM Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Il giorno lun 13 feb 2023 alle ore 14:33 Rich Bowen
> > > <rb...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> > > >
> > > > Please talk with the Brooklyn folks before taking this step. In
> their February board report they indicate that jclouds is one of their main
> dependencies, and if you move to the attic, they would be compelled to
> either find an alternative or reboot (or fork) the project. This indicates,
> at least to me, that there are people in that project have both the
> expertise and incentive to keep this project alive. As such, it would be
> wise to reach out to them, and see whether any of them can augment the
> project to keep it alive, or possibly some other solution. But please don't
> take this step without at least speaking to them. Thanks.
> > >
> > > I would also add that Apache Pulsar is using JClouds and we (Pulsar
> > > PMC) would be needed to fork or to move to the Brooklyn fork in case
> > > that the projects moves there
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2023/01/29 08:07:48 Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > > > > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> > > > > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run
> a
> > > > > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and
> vote.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Geoff,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let
> other
> > > > > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a
> brand
> > > > > > new alternative, ...).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <
> geomacy@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add
> new active
> > > > > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the
> attic does
> > > > > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each
> downstream project
> > > > > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> jb@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a
> community
> > > > > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC
> members don't
> > > > > > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I
> think I'm the
> > > > > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer
> list (and
> > > > > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so
> projects can
> > > > > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this
> direction. It's
> > > > > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to
> move
> > > > > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the
> preferred
> > > > > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers
> APIs.
> > > > > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the
> part
> > > > > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine
> having
> > > > > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the
> discussion in this
> > > > > > > > thread.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <
> geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is
> helpful to scope the
> > > > > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes
> 10 hours for
> > > > > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take
> perhaps
> > > > > > > > significantly
> > > > > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even
> after an initial
> > > > > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations
> I'm sure.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an
> interest in this
> > > > > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and
> anyone else for
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for
> jclouds to
> > > > > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to
> commit to the
> > > > > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going
> forward
> > > > > > > > (becoming
> > > > > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as
> Andrew outlined,
> > > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age
> (e.g. that gson
> > > > > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers
> for jclouds to
> > > > > > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic
> doesn't need to be
> > > > > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe
> the attic is
> > > > > > > > now
> > > > > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort
> would be
> > > > > > > > better
> > > > > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without
> jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for
> replacing
> > > > > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new
> abstraction.
> > > > > > > > Who
> > > > > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and
> assist us moving
> > > > > > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to
> maintaining jclouds,
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff
> Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort
> is required
> > > > > > > > here?
> > > > > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without
> necessarily doing
> > > > > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number
> of active
> > > > > > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates,
> security fixes,
> > > > > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a
> release which
> > > > > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single
> motivated person could
> > > > > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But
> practically, the
> > > > > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that
> two people
> > > > > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx
> time commitment).
> > > > > > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and
> publish a
> > > > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10
> hours?)
> > > > > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure
> is required to
> > > > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and
> run integration
> > > > > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1
> but running
> > > > > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky
> and broken
> > > > > > > > tests
> > > > > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the
> diff between
> > > > > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to
> learn the
> > > > > > > > codebase
> > > > > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation
> mechanism
> > > > > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?)
> uses Guice
> > > > > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to
> understand.  We
> > > > > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but
> socially this
> > > > > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think
> that the technical
> > > > > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less
> pleasant to work
> > > > > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this
> answers your
> > > > > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and
> cloud
> > > > > > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how
> this all
> > > > > > > > works.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we
> can each more
> > > > > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say
> "yes", we may
> > > > > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the
> goal.  If there are
> > > > > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then
> please do so.  But
> > > > > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.
> jclouds continues
> > > > > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0
> incompatibility) and there
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step
> back and compare
> > > > > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to
> evaluate what
> > > > > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that
> reimplementing
> > > > > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead
> jclouds or a
> > > > > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus
> only on
> > > > > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so
> users can become
> > > > > > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > >
> >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Rich Bowen <rb...@apache.org>]

Thank you for providing this additional context, and for your patience with an outsider swooping in with solutions. :)

I'll go read that thread and correct my misconceptions. It seems a great shame to have to either fork or reboot a project, when one is there, but I am glad to hear that you're already investigating options.

--Rich

On 2023/02/13 14:01:11 Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> FWIW, this is the complete discussion:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/w61gzk2ohjtshbwcb5gy6wb2htv7fo0x
> 
> It was actually cross-posted to the Brooklyn dev list [1] and some of
> the PMC members there expressed their opinion.
> 
> We are, however, somehow blocked by inaction and I honestly don't know
> what would be the best way to move forward:
> 
> On one hand, we'd love to have jclouds around and avoid moving it to the attic.
> On the other hand, though, we feel we must be responsible to the
> community and properly set expectations and reflect the project
> reality, retiring it if there is no real energy/time to continue it.
> This thread is several months old now, and nothing has changed. We did
> several calls to action with concrete requests for help, but no
> further engagement happened.
> 
> I know we all have the best intentions here when willing to keep
> jclouds alive, but after several failed requests for help to those
> that want to keep the project alive, and several months of waiting and
> going in circles...
> Are we doing the right thing for the community by changing the current
> jclouds project PMC with another inactive PMC? (And if anyone thinks
> the new PMC wouldn't be inactive... why has no one taken any action in
> all these months?).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 0.02$
> 
> I.
> 
> 
> 
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/6o20d0w1f1xroyo4vv33hlvyb1lk4ndd
> 
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 2:54 PM Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Il giorno lun 13 feb 2023 alle ore 14:33 Rich Bowen
> > <rb...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> > >
> > > Please talk with the Brooklyn folks before taking this step. In their February board report they indicate that jclouds is one of their main dependencies, and if you move to the attic, they would be compelled to either find an alternative or reboot (or fork) the project. This indicates, at least to me, that there are people in that project have both the expertise and incentive to keep this project alive. As such, it would be wise to reach out to them, and see whether any of them can augment the project to keep it alive, or possibly some other solution. But please don't take this step without at least speaking to them. Thanks.
> >
> > I would also add that Apache Pulsar is using JClouds and we (Pulsar
> > PMC) would be needed to fork or to move to the Brooklyn fork in case
> > that the projects moves there
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2023/01/29 08:07:48 Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > > > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> > > > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> > > > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > > Hi Geoff,
> > > > >
> > > > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > > > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> > > > > new alternative, ...).
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> > > > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> > > > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> > > > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > > > > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > > > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > > > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > > > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > > > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > > > > > > thread.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > > > > significantly
> > > > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > > > > > (becoming
> > > > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > > > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > > > > > > now
> > > > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > > > > > > better
> > > > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > > > > > > Who
> > > > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > > > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > > > > > > here?
> > > > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > > > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > > > > > > tests
> > > > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > > > > > > codebase
> > > > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > > > > > > works.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > > > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > > > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > >
> 

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

FWIW, this is the complete discussion:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/w61gzk2ohjtshbwcb5gy6wb2htv7fo0x

It was actually cross-posted to the Brooklyn dev list [1] and some of
the PMC members there expressed their opinion.

We are, however, somehow blocked by inaction and I honestly don't know
what would be the best way to move forward:

On one hand, we'd love to have jclouds around and avoid moving it to the attic.
On the other hand, though, we feel we must be responsible to the
community and properly set expectations and reflect the project
reality, retiring it if there is no real energy/time to continue it.
This thread is several months old now, and nothing has changed. We did
several calls to action with concrete requests for help, but no
further engagement happened.

I know we all have the best intentions here when willing to keep
jclouds alive, but after several failed requests for help to those
that want to keep the project alive, and several months of waiting and
going in circles...
Are we doing the right thing for the community by changing the current
jclouds project PMC with another inactive PMC? (And if anyone thinks
the new PMC wouldn't be inactive... why has no one taken any action in
all these months?).




My 0.02$

I.



[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/6o20d0w1f1xroyo4vv33hlvyb1lk4ndd

On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 2:54 PM Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Il giorno lun 13 feb 2023 alle ore 14:33 Rich Bowen
> <rb...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> >
> > Please talk with the Brooklyn folks before taking this step. In their February board report they indicate that jclouds is one of their main dependencies, and if you move to the attic, they would be compelled to either find an alternative or reboot (or fork) the project. This indicates, at least to me, that there are people in that project have both the expertise and incentive to keep this project alive. As such, it would be wise to reach out to them, and see whether any of them can augment the project to keep it alive, or possibly some other solution. But please don't take this step without at least speaking to them. Thanks.
>
> I would also add that Apache Pulsar is using JClouds and we (Pulsar
> PMC) would be needed to fork or to move to the Brooklyn fork in case
> that the projects moves there
>
> Enrico
>
> >
> >
> > On 2023/01/29 08:07:48 Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> > > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> > > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > Hi Geoff,
> > > >
> > > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> > > >
> > > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> > > > new alternative, ...).
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi JB
> > > > >
> > > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> > > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> > > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> > > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > > > >
> > > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > > > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > > > > > thread.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > > > significantly
> > > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > > > > (becoming
> > > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > > > > > but
> > > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > > > > > now
> > > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > > > > > better
> > > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > > > > > Who
> > > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > > > > > here?
> > > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > > > > > tests
> > > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > > > > > codebase
> > > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > > > > > works.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Gaul
> > > http://gaul.org/
> > >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>]

Il giorno lun 13 feb 2023 alle ore 14:33 Rich Bowen
<rb...@apache.org> ha scritto:
>
> Please talk with the Brooklyn folks before taking this step. In their February board report they indicate that jclouds is one of their main dependencies, and if you move to the attic, they would be compelled to either find an alternative or reboot (or fork) the project. This indicates, at least to me, that there are people in that project have both the expertise and incentive to keep this project alive. As such, it would be wise to reach out to them, and see whether any of them can augment the project to keep it alive, or possibly some other solution. But please don't take this step without at least speaking to them. Thanks.

I would also add that Apache Pulsar is using JClouds and we (Pulsar
PMC) would be needed to fork or to move to the Brooklyn fork in case
that the projects moves there

Enrico

>
>
> On 2023/01/29 08:07:48 Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > Hi Geoff,
> > >
> > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> > >
> > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> > >
> > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> > > new alternative, ...).
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi JB
> > > >
> > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > > >
> > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > > >
> > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > > >
> > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > > > > thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > > significantly
> > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > > > > that
> > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > > > (becoming
> > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > > > > but
> > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > > > > now
> > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > > > > better
> > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > > > > Who
> > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > > > > can
> > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > > > > here?
> > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > > > > much
> > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > > > > release
> > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > > > > test
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > > > > tests
> > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > > > > codebase
> > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > > > > works.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@gmail.com>]

Hi Rich,

Just to chip in my two cents' worth, we in Apache Brooklyn have been
involved in the discussions, and have tried to see if people can be found
to help continue jclouds. The eventual outcome of all the discussion,
however, seems to be that the attic is, sadly, the most realistic option
for the project at this point.

Ignasi, just on the point of

> We did several calls to action with concrete requests for help, but
no further engagement happened.

I don't think that's quite fair - numerous people both from Brooklyn and
other projects engaged with the discussions. What hasn't happened is people
stepping up to commit the necessary time to maintain and forward-develop
the project. To which point, John, on the point of

> We all have excuses, including, "my day job is already a full time
effort"

I think people are just being honest here, not making excuses.  As you say,
maintaining an open source project is a significant commitment,
especially on the scale of jclouds. I can speak only for myself I guess, so
to recap what I said earlier, I did really think about making the
commitment to start contributing to jclouds development and releases, but I
feel that if I did so I would just be kidding myself and everyone else. I
don't want to do that. I imagine others feel similarly.

As regards

> We've had plenty of emails from other project contributors indicating
that they'd have to fork if jclouds move to the attic.

It's not clear right now to us in Brooklyn what the implications of the
change are. Forking (part of?) jclouds would be one option, but as you say,
if we want to do that, why not just maintain the project?  However, I'm not
sure it is the likeliest of options. There are other possibilities, such as
implementing a minimal subset of jclouds-like functionality within
Brooklyn, just to cover our main use-cases. Other more radical options
might even involve changing the Brooklyn model to an extent. Right now it's
not clear. I have been meaning to kick off that discussion on
dev@brooklyn.a.o and this has prompted me again.

Regards to all,

Geoff








On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 17:17, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:

> Hi Rich,
>
> agree, it's what I bring to the thread multiple times (at least
> Brooklyn and Pulsar communities are willing to help, or find an
> alternative (fork or whatever)).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 2:33 PM Rich Bowen <rb...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Please talk with the Brooklyn folks before taking this step. In their
> February board report they indicate that jclouds is one of their main
> dependencies, and if you move to the attic, they would be compelled to
> either find an alternative or reboot (or fork) the project. This indicates,
> at least to me, that there are people in that project have both the
> expertise and incentive to keep this project alive. As such, it would be
> wise to reach out to them, and see whether any of them can augment the
> project to keep it alive, or possibly some other solution. But please don't
> take this step without at least speaking to them. Thanks.
> >
> >
> > On 2023/01/29 08:07:48 Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> > > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> > > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > Hi Geoff,
> > > >
> > > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> > > >
> > > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a
> brand
> > > > new alternative, ...).
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi JB
> > > > >
> > > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new
> active
> > > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the
> attic does
> > > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream
> project
> > > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > > > >
> > > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> jb@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members
> don't
> > > > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think
> I'm the
> > > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer
> list (and
> > > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so
> projects can
> > > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction.
> It's
> > > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the
> preferred
> > > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine
> having
> > > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in
> this
> > > > > > thread.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <
> geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to
> scope the
> > > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10
> hours for
> > > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > > > significantly
> > > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an
> initial
> > > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm
> sure.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest
> in this
> > > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone
> else for
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for
> jclouds to
> > > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to
> commit to the
> > > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going
> forward
> > > > > > (becoming
> > > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew
> outlined,
> > > > > > but
> > > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g.
> that gson
> > > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for
> jclouds to
> > > > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't
> need to be
> > > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the
> attic is
> > > > > > now
> > > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort
> would be
> > > > > > better
> > > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without
> jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for
> replacing
> > > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new
> abstraction.
> > > > > > Who
> > > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and
> assist us moving
> > > > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining
> jclouds,
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is
> required
> > > > > > here?
> > > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without
> necessarily doing
> > > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of
> active
> > > > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates,
> security fixes,
> > > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a
> release which
> > > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated
> person could
> > > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But
> practically, the
> > > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two
> people
> > > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time
> commitment).
> > > > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and
> publish a
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is
> required to
> > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run
> integration
> > > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but
> running
> > > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and
> broken
> > > > > > tests
> > > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff
> between
> > > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn
> the
> > > > > > codebase
> > > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation
> mechanism
> > > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?)
> uses Guice
> > > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to
> understand.  We
> > > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but
> socially this
> > > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that
> the technical
> > > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less
> pleasant to work
> > > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this
> answers your
> > > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how
> this all
> > > > > > works.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can
> each more
> > > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say
> "yes", we may
> > > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If
> there are
> > > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please
> do so.  But
> > > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.
> jclouds continues
> > > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility)
> and there
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back
> and compare
> > > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to
> evaluate what
> > > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that
> reimplementing
> > > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead
> jclouds or a
> > > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only
> on
> > > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users
> can become
> > > > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Gaul
> > > http://gaul.org/
> > >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@gmail.com>]

Hi Rich,

Just to chip in my two cents' worth, we in Apache Brooklyn have been
involved in the discussions, and have tried to see if people can be found
to help continue jclouds. The eventual outcome of all the discussion,
however, seems to be that the attic is, sadly, the most realistic option
for the project at this point.

Ignasi, just on the point of

> We did several calls to action with concrete requests for help, but
no further engagement happened.

I don't think that's quite fair - numerous people both from Brooklyn and
other projects engaged with the discussions. What hasn't happened is people
stepping up to commit the necessary time to maintain and forward-develop
the project. To which point, John, on the point of

> We all have excuses, including, "my day job is already a full time
effort"

I think people are just being honest here, not making excuses.  As you say,
maintaining an open source project is a significant commitment,
especially on the scale of jclouds. I can speak only for myself I guess, so
to recap what I said earlier, I did really think about making the
commitment to start contributing to jclouds development and releases, but I
feel that if I did so I would just be kidding myself and everyone else. I
don't want to do that. I imagine others feel similarly.

As regards

> We've had plenty of emails from other project contributors indicating
that they'd have to fork if jclouds move to the attic.

It's not clear right now to us in Brooklyn what the implications of the
change are. Forking (part of?) jclouds would be one option, but as you say,
if we want to do that, why not just maintain the project?  However, I'm not
sure it is the likeliest of options. There are other possibilities, such as
implementing a minimal subset of jclouds-like functionality within
Brooklyn, just to cover our main use-cases. Other more radical options
might even involve changing the Brooklyn model to an extent. Right now it's
not clear. I have been meaning to kick off that discussion on
dev@brooklyn.a.o and this has prompted me again.

Regards to all,

Geoff








On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 17:17, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:

> Hi Rich,
>
> agree, it's what I bring to the thread multiple times (at least
> Brooklyn and Pulsar communities are willing to help, or find an
> alternative (fork or whatever)).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 2:33 PM Rich Bowen <rb...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Please talk with the Brooklyn folks before taking this step. In their
> February board report they indicate that jclouds is one of their main
> dependencies, and if you move to the attic, they would be compelled to
> either find an alternative or reboot (or fork) the project. This indicates,
> at least to me, that there are people in that project have both the
> expertise and incentive to keep this project alive. As such, it would be
> wise to reach out to them, and see whether any of them can augment the
> project to keep it alive, or possibly some other solution. But please don't
> take this step without at least speaking to them. Thanks.
> >
> >
> > On 2023/01/29 08:07:48 Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> > > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> > > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > Hi Geoff,
> > > >
> > > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> > > >
> > > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a
> brand
> > > > new alternative, ...).
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi JB
> > > > >
> > > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new
> active
> > > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the
> attic does
> > > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream
> project
> > > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > > > >
> > > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> jb@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members
> don't
> > > > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think
> I'm the
> > > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer
> list (and
> > > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so
> projects can
> > > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction.
> It's
> > > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the
> preferred
> > > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine
> having
> > > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in
> this
> > > > > > thread.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <
> geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to
> scope the
> > > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10
> hours for
> > > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > > > significantly
> > > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an
> initial
> > > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm
> sure.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest
> in this
> > > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone
> else for
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for
> jclouds to
> > > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to
> commit to the
> > > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going
> forward
> > > > > > (becoming
> > > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew
> outlined,
> > > > > > but
> > > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g.
> that gson
> > > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for
> jclouds to
> > > > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't
> need to be
> > > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the
> attic is
> > > > > > now
> > > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort
> would be
> > > > > > better
> > > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without
> jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for
> replacing
> > > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new
> abstraction.
> > > > > > Who
> > > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and
> assist us moving
> > > > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining
> jclouds,
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is
> required
> > > > > > here?
> > > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without
> necessarily doing
> > > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of
> active
> > > > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates,
> security fixes,
> > > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a
> release which
> > > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated
> person could
> > > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But
> practically, the
> > > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two
> people
> > > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time
> commitment).
> > > > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and
> publish a
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is
> required to
> > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run
> integration
> > > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but
> running
> > > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and
> broken
> > > > > > tests
> > > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff
> between
> > > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn
> the
> > > > > > codebase
> > > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation
> mechanism
> > > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?)
> uses Guice
> > > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to
> understand.  We
> > > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but
> socially this
> > > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that
> the technical
> > > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less
> pleasant to work
> > > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this
> answers your
> > > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how
> this all
> > > > > > works.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can
> each more
> > > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say
> "yes", we may
> > > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If
> there are
> > > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please
> do so.  But
> > > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.
> jclouds continues
> > > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility)
> and there
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back
> and compare
> > > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to
> evaluate what
> > > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that
> reimplementing
> > > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead
> jclouds or a
> > > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only
> on
> > > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users
> can become
> > > > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Gaul
> > > http://gaul.org/
> > >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi Rich,

agree, it's what I bring to the thread multiple times (at least
Brooklyn and Pulsar communities are willing to help, or find an
alternative (fork or whatever)).

Regards
JB

On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 2:33 PM Rich Bowen <rb...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Please talk with the Brooklyn folks before taking this step. In their February board report they indicate that jclouds is one of their main dependencies, and if you move to the attic, they would be compelled to either find an alternative or reboot (or fork) the project. This indicates, at least to me, that there are people in that project have both the expertise and incentive to keep this project alive. As such, it would be wise to reach out to them, and see whether any of them can augment the project to keep it alive, or possibly some other solution. But please don't take this step without at least speaking to them. Thanks.
>
>
> On 2023/01/29 08:07:48 Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > Hi Geoff,
> > >
> > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> > >
> > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> > >
> > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> > > new alternative, ...).
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi JB
> > > >
> > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > > >
> > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > > >
> > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > > >
> > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > > > > thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > > significantly
> > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > > > > that
> > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > > > (becoming
> > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > > > > but
> > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > > > > now
> > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > > > > better
> > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > > > > Who
> > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > > > > can
> > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > > > > here?
> > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > > > > much
> > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > > > > release
> > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > > > > test
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > > > > tests
> > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > > > > codebase
> > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > > > > works.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Rich Bowen <rb...@apache.org>]

Please talk with the Brooklyn folks before taking this step. In their February board report they indicate that jclouds is one of their main dependencies, and if you move to the attic, they would be compelled to either find an alternative or reboot (or fork) the project. This indicates, at least to me, that there are people in that project have both the expertise and incentive to keep this project alive. As such, it would be wise to reach out to them, and see whether any of them can augment the project to keep it alive, or possibly some other solution. But please don't take this step without at least speaking to them. Thanks.


On 2023/01/29 08:07:48 Andrew Gaul wrote:
> Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
> 
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi Geoff,
> > 
> > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> > 
> > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> > 
> > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> > new alternative, ...).
> > 
> > Regards
> > JB
> > 
> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi JB
> > >
> > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > >
> > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > >
> > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > >
> > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > >
> > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > >
> > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > > > thread.
> > > >
> > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > significantly
> > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > > > >
> > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > >
> > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > > > that
> > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > > (becoming
> > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > > > but
> > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > > > now
> > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > > > better
> > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > > > Who
> > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > >
> > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > > > can
> > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > >
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > > > here?
> > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > > > much
> > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > > > release
> > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > > > test
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > > > tests
> > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > > > releases.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > > > codebase
> > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > > > works.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > > > easily
> > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > > > avoid
> > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > > > is
> > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > >
> > > >
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/
> 

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

Forwarding with the jclouds users list address fixed



On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:15 AM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> This is a call to action for everyone that expressed interest in helping
> keep the project alive.
> There has been a concrete request for help here:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7lg1y0rjp2xlkxhkkg76190tx2lznjt
>
> Who can take it?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 6:26 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Fair enough. Thanks Andrew.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> JB
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
>> > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
>> > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>> > > Hi Geoff,
>> > >
>> > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
>> > >
>> > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
>> > >
>> > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
>> > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
>> > > new alternative, ...).
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > > JB
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi JB
>> > > >
>> > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new
>> active
>> > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic
>> does
>> > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream
>> project
>> > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
>> > > >
>> > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards
>> > > > Geoff
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Hi,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
>> > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members
>> don't
>> > > > > want to be involved anymore.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think
>> I'm the
>> > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
>> > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list
>> (and
>> > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so
>> projects can
>> > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction.
>> It's
>> > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
>> > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
>> > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the
>> preferred
>> > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
>> > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
>> > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
>> > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in
>> this
>> > > > > thread.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Happy new year to all,
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > JB
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <
>> geomacy@apache.org>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi all,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to
>> scope the
>> > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10
>> hours for
>> > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
>> > > > > significantly
>> > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an
>> initial
>> > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm
>> sure.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in
>> this
>> > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone
>> else for
>> > > > > that
>> > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for
>> jclouds to
>> > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to
>> commit to the
>> > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
>> > > > > (becoming
>> > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew
>> outlined,
>> > > > > but
>> > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g.
>> that gson
>> > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for
>> jclouds to
>> > > > > > continue; three would be better.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't
>> need to be
>> > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the
>> attic is
>> > > > > now
>> > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort
>> would be
>> > > > > better
>> > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without
>> jclouds. E.g.
>> > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for
>> replacing
>> > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new
>> abstraction.
>> > > > > Who
>> > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist
>> us moving
>> > > > > > on from Java 8.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining
>> jclouds,
>> > > > > can
>> > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney
>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is
>> required
>> > > > > here?
>> > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without
>> necessarily doing
>> > > > > much
>> > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of
>> active
>> > > > > > > contributors
>> > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates,
>> security fixes,
>> > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a
>> release which
>> > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated
>> person could
>> > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But
>> practically, the
>> > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two
>> people
>> > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time
>> commitment).
>> > > > > > > Let's
>> > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and
>> publish a
>> > > > > release
>> > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
>> > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
>> > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
>> > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
>> > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
>> > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is
>> required to
>> > > > > test
>> > > > > > > a
>> > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run
>> integration
>> > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but
>> running
>> > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and
>> broken
>> > > > > tests
>> > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff
>> between
>> > > > > > > releases.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn
>> the
>> > > > > codebase
>> > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation
>> mechanism
>> > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses
>> Guice
>> > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to
>> understand.  We
>> > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but
>> socially this
>> > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the
>> technical
>> > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less
>> pleasant to work
>> > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this
>> answers your
>> > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
>> > > > > ecosystems
>> > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this
>> all
>> > > > > works.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can
>> each more
>> > > > > easily
>> > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say
>> "yes", we may
>> > > > > avoid
>> > > > > > > > the attic yet.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If
>> there are
>> > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do
>> so.  But
>> > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds
>> continues
>> > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility)
>> and there
>> > > > > is
>> > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back
>> and compare
>> > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to
>> evaluate what
>> > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that
>> reimplementing
>> > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead
>> jclouds or a
>> > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
>> > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users
>> can become
>> > > > > > > contributors more easily.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
>> > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Andrew Gaul
>> > http://gaul.org/
>>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

Forwarding with the jclouds users list address fixed



On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:15 AM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> This is a call to action for everyone that expressed interest in helping
> keep the project alive.
> There has been a concrete request for help here:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7lg1y0rjp2xlkxhkkg76190tx2lznjt
>
> Who can take it?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 6:26 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Fair enough. Thanks Andrew.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> JB
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
>> > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
>> > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>> > > Hi Geoff,
>> > >
>> > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
>> > >
>> > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
>> > >
>> > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
>> > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
>> > > new alternative, ...).
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > > JB
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi JB
>> > > >
>> > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new
>> active
>> > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic
>> does
>> > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream
>> project
>> > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
>> > > >
>> > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards
>> > > > Geoff
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Hi,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
>> > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members
>> don't
>> > > > > want to be involved anymore.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think
>> I'm the
>> > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
>> > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list
>> (and
>> > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so
>> projects can
>> > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction.
>> It's
>> > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
>> > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
>> > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the
>> preferred
>> > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
>> > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
>> > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
>> > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in
>> this
>> > > > > thread.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Happy new year to all,
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > JB
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <
>> geomacy@apache.org>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi all,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to
>> scope the
>> > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10
>> hours for
>> > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
>> > > > > significantly
>> > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an
>> initial
>> > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm
>> sure.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in
>> this
>> > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone
>> else for
>> > > > > that
>> > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for
>> jclouds to
>> > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to
>> commit to the
>> > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
>> > > > > (becoming
>> > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew
>> outlined,
>> > > > > but
>> > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g.
>> that gson
>> > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for
>> jclouds to
>> > > > > > continue; three would be better.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't
>> need to be
>> > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the
>> attic is
>> > > > > now
>> > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort
>> would be
>> > > > > better
>> > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without
>> jclouds. E.g.
>> > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for
>> replacing
>> > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new
>> abstraction.
>> > > > > Who
>> > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist
>> us moving
>> > > > > > on from Java 8.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining
>> jclouds,
>> > > > > can
>> > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney
>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is
>> required
>> > > > > here?
>> > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without
>> necessarily doing
>> > > > > much
>> > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of
>> active
>> > > > > > > contributors
>> > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates,
>> security fixes,
>> > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a
>> release which
>> > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated
>> person could
>> > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But
>> practically, the
>> > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two
>> people
>> > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time
>> commitment).
>> > > > > > > Let's
>> > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and
>> publish a
>> > > > > release
>> > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
>> > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
>> > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
>> > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
>> > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
>> > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is
>> required to
>> > > > > test
>> > > > > > > a
>> > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run
>> integration
>> > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but
>> running
>> > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and
>> broken
>> > > > > tests
>> > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff
>> between
>> > > > > > > releases.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn
>> the
>> > > > > codebase
>> > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation
>> mechanism
>> > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses
>> Guice
>> > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to
>> understand.  We
>> > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but
>> socially this
>> > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the
>> technical
>> > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less
>> pleasant to work
>> > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this
>> answers your
>> > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
>> > > > > ecosystems
>> > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this
>> all
>> > > > > works.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can
>> each more
>> > > > > easily
>> > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say
>> "yes", we may
>> > > > > avoid
>> > > > > > > > the attic yet.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If
>> there are
>> > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do
>> so.  But
>> > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds
>> continues
>> > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility)
>> and there
>> > > > > is
>> > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back
>> and compare
>> > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to
>> evaluate what
>> > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that
>> reimplementing
>> > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead
>> jclouds or a
>> > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
>> > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users
>> can become
>> > > > > > > contributors more easily.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
>> > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Andrew Gaul
>> > http://gaul.org/
>>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

Forwarding with the jclouds users list address fixed



On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:15 AM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> This is a call to action for everyone that expressed interest in helping
> keep the project alive.
> There has been a concrete request for help here:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7lg1y0rjp2xlkxhkkg76190tx2lznjt
>
> Who can take it?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 6:26 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Fair enough. Thanks Andrew.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> JB
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
>> > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
>> > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>> > > Hi Geoff,
>> > >
>> > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
>> > >
>> > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
>> > >
>> > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
>> > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
>> > > new alternative, ...).
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > > JB
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi JB
>> > > >
>> > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new
>> active
>> > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic
>> does
>> > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream
>> project
>> > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
>> > > >
>> > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards
>> > > > Geoff
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Hi,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
>> > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members
>> don't
>> > > > > want to be involved anymore.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think
>> I'm the
>> > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
>> > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list
>> (and
>> > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so
>> projects can
>> > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction.
>> It's
>> > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
>> > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
>> > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the
>> preferred
>> > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
>> > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
>> > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
>> > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in
>> this
>> > > > > thread.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Happy new year to all,
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > JB
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <
>> geomacy@apache.org>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi all,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to
>> scope the
>> > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10
>> hours for
>> > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
>> > > > > significantly
>> > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an
>> initial
>> > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm
>> sure.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in
>> this
>> > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone
>> else for
>> > > > > that
>> > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for
>> jclouds to
>> > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to
>> commit to the
>> > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
>> > > > > (becoming
>> > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew
>> outlined,
>> > > > > but
>> > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g.
>> that gson
>> > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for
>> jclouds to
>> > > > > > continue; three would be better.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't
>> need to be
>> > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the
>> attic is
>> > > > > now
>> > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort
>> would be
>> > > > > better
>> > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without
>> jclouds. E.g.
>> > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for
>> replacing
>> > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new
>> abstraction.
>> > > > > Who
>> > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist
>> us moving
>> > > > > > on from Java 8.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining
>> jclouds,
>> > > > > can
>> > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney
>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is
>> required
>> > > > > here?
>> > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without
>> necessarily doing
>> > > > > much
>> > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of
>> active
>> > > > > > > contributors
>> > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates,
>> security fixes,
>> > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a
>> release which
>> > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated
>> person could
>> > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But
>> practically, the
>> > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two
>> people
>> > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time
>> commitment).
>> > > > > > > Let's
>> > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and
>> publish a
>> > > > > release
>> > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
>> > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
>> > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
>> > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
>> > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
>> > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is
>> required to
>> > > > > test
>> > > > > > > a
>> > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run
>> integration
>> > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but
>> running
>> > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and
>> broken
>> > > > > tests
>> > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff
>> between
>> > > > > > > releases.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn
>> the
>> > > > > codebase
>> > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation
>> mechanism
>> > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses
>> Guice
>> > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to
>> understand.  We
>> > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but
>> socially this
>> > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the
>> technical
>> > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less
>> pleasant to work
>> > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this
>> answers your
>> > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
>> > > > > ecosystems
>> > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this
>> all
>> > > > > works.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can
>> each more
>> > > > > easily
>> > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say
>> "yes", we may
>> > > > > avoid
>> > > > > > > > the attic yet.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If
>> there are
>> > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do
>> so.  But
>> > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds
>> continues
>> > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility)
>> and there
>> > > > > is
>> > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back
>> and compare
>> > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to
>> evaluate what
>> > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that
>> reimplementing
>> > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead
>> jclouds or a
>> > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
>> > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users
>> can become
>> > > > > > > contributors more easily.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
>> > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Andrew Gaul
>> > http://gaul.org/
>>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

Hi!

This is a call to action for everyone that expressed interest in helping
keep the project alive.
There has been a concrete request for help here:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7lg1y0rjp2xlkxhkkg76190tx2lznjt

Who can take it?





On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 6:26 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:

> Fair enough. Thanks Andrew.
>
> Regards
>
> JB
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > Hi Geoff,
> > >
> > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> > >
> > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> > >
> > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> > > new alternative, ...).
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi JB
> > > >
> > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new
> active
> > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic
> does
> > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream
> project
> > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > > >
> > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members
> don't
> > > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > > >
> > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm
> the
> > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list
> (and
> > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects
> can
> > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the
> preferred
> > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > > >
> > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in
> this
> > > > > thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <
> geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to
> scope the
> > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10
> hours for
> > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > > significantly
> > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an
> initial
> > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm
> sure.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in
> this
> > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone
> else for
> > > > > that
> > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for
> jclouds to
> > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit
> to the
> > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > > > (becoming
> > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew
> outlined,
> > > > > but
> > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g.
> that gson
> > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for
> jclouds to
> > > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't
> need to be
> > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the
> attic is
> > > > > now
> > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would
> be
> > > > > better
> > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without
> jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for
> replacing
> > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new
> abstraction.
> > > > > Who
> > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist
> us moving
> > > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining
> jclouds,
> > > > > can
> > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is
> required
> > > > > here?
> > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without
> necessarily doing
> > > > > much
> > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of
> active
> > > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security
> fixes,
> > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a
> release which
> > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated
> person could
> > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But
> practically, the
> > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two
> people
> > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time
> commitment).
> > > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and
> publish a
> > > > > release
> > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is
> required to
> > > > > test
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run
> integration
> > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but
> running
> > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and
> broken
> > > > > tests
> > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff
> between
> > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn
> the
> > > > > codebase
> > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation
> mechanism
> > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses
> Guice
> > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to
> understand.  We
> > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially
> this
> > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the
> technical
> > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant
> to work
> > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers
> your
> > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this
> all
> > > > > works.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each
> more
> > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes",
> we may
> > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If
> there are
> > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do
> so.  But
> > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds
> continues
> > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility)
> and there
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back
> and compare
> > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate
> what
> > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that
> reimplementing
> > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds
> or a
> > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users
> can become
> > > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

Hi!

This is a call to action for everyone that expressed interest in helping
keep the project alive.
There has been a concrete request for help here:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7lg1y0rjp2xlkxhkkg76190tx2lznjt

Who can take it?





On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 6:26 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:

> Fair enough. Thanks Andrew.
>
> Regards
>
> JB
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> > think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> > final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > Hi Geoff,
> > >
> > > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> > >
> > > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> > >
> > > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> > > new alternative, ...).
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi JB
> > > >
> > > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new
> active
> > > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic
> does
> > > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream
> project
> > > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > > >
> > > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members
> don't
> > > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > > >
> > > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm
> the
> > > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list
> (and
> > > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects
> can
> > > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the
> preferred
> > > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > > >
> > > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in
> this
> > > > > thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <
> geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to
> scope the
> > > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10
> hours for
> > > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > > significantly
> > > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an
> initial
> > > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm
> sure.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in
> this
> > > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone
> else for
> > > > > that
> > > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for
> jclouds to
> > > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit
> to the
> > > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > > > (becoming
> > > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew
> outlined,
> > > > > but
> > > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g.
> that gson
> > > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for
> jclouds to
> > > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't
> need to be
> > > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the
> attic is
> > > > > now
> > > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would
> be
> > > > > better
> > > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without
> jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for
> replacing
> > > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new
> abstraction.
> > > > > Who
> > > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist
> us moving
> > > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining
> jclouds,
> > > > > can
> > > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is
> required
> > > > > here?
> > > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without
> necessarily doing
> > > > > much
> > > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of
> active
> > > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security
> fixes,
> > > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a
> release which
> > > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated
> person could
> > > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But
> practically, the
> > > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two
> people
> > > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time
> commitment).
> > > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and
> publish a
> > > > > release
> > > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is
> required to
> > > > > test
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run
> integration
> > > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but
> running
> > > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and
> broken
> > > > > tests
> > > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff
> between
> > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn
> the
> > > > > codebase
> > > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation
> mechanism
> > > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses
> Guice
> > > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to
> understand.  We
> > > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially
> this
> > > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the
> technical
> > > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant
> to work
> > > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers
> your
> > > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this
> all
> > > > > works.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each
> more
> > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes",
> we may
> > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If
> there are
> > > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do
> so.  But
> > > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds
> continues
> > > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility)
> and there
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back
> and compare
> > > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate
> what
> > > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that
> reimplementing
> > > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds
> or a
> > > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users
> can become
> > > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Fair enough. Thanks Andrew.

Regards

JB

On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi Geoff,
> >
> > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> >
> > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> >
> > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> > new alternative, ...).
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi JB
> > >
> > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > >
> > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > >
> > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > >
> > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > >
> > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > >
> > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > > > thread.
> > > >
> > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > significantly
> > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > > > >
> > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > >
> > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > > > that
> > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > > (becoming
> > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > > > but
> > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > > > now
> > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > > > better
> > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > > > Who
> > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > >
> > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > > > can
> > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > >
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > > > here?
> > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > > > much
> > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > > > release
> > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > > > test
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > > > tests
> > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > > > releases.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > > > codebase
> > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > > > works.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > > > easily
> > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > > > avoid
> > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > > > is
> > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > >
> > > >
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Fair enough. Thanks Andrew.

Regards

JB

On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
> think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
> final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi Geoff,
> >
> > To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> >
> > Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> >
> > So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> > projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> > new alternative, ...).
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi JB
> > >
> > > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> > > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> > > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> > > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> > >
> > > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > > >
> > > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > > > want to be involved anymore.
> > > >
> > > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > > >
> > > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > > >
> > > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > > > thread.
> > > >
> > > > Happy new year to all,
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > > significantly
> > > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > > > >
> > > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > > >
> > > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > > > that
> > > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > > (becoming
> > > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > > > but
> > > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > > > now
> > > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > > > better
> > > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > > > Who
> > > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > > > on from Java 8.
> > > > >
> > > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > > > can
> > > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > > >
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > > > here?
> > > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > > > much
> > > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > > > Let's
> > > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > > > release
> > > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > > > test
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > > > tests
> > > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > > > releases.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > > > codebase
> > > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > > ecosystems
> > > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > > > works.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > > > easily
> > > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > > > avoid
> > > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > > > is
> > > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > > >
> > > >
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi Geoff,
> 
> To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> 
> Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> 
> So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> new alternative, ...).
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi JB
> >
> > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> >
> > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> >
> > Regards
> > Geoff
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > >
> > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > > want to be involved anymore.
> > >
> > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > >
> > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > >
> > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > > thread.
> > >
> > > Happy new year to all,
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > significantly
> > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > > >
> > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > >
> > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > > that
> > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > >
> > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > (becoming
> > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > > but
> > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > > now
> > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > > better
> > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > > Who
> > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > > on from Java 8.
> > > >
> > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > > can
> > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > >
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > > here?
> > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > > much
> > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > > contributors
> > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > >
> > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > >
> > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > > Let's
> > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > > release
> > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > >
> > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > >
> > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > >
> > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > > test
> > > > > a
> > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > >
> > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > > tests
> > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > > releases.
> > > > >
> > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > > codebase
> > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > >
> > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > ecosystems
> > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > > works.
> > > > >
> > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > > easily
> > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > > avoid
> > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > > is
> > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > >
> > >

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

Retiring the project to the attic is not my preferred outcome but I
think accurately captures the current state of affairs.  Let's run a
final release then we can proceed with a formal discussion and vote.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi Geoff,
> 
> To Geoff and others, happy new year :)
> 
> Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.
> 
> So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
> projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
> new alternative, ...).
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi JB
> >
> > It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> > contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> > seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> > to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
> >
> > Belated Happy New Year to all.
> >
> > Regards
> > Geoff
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> > >
> > > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > > want to be involved anymore.
> > >
> > > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> > >
> > > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> > >
> > > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > > thread.
> > >
> > > Happy new year to all,
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > > significantly
> > > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > > >
> > > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > > >
> > > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > > that
> > > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > > >
> > > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > > (becoming
> > > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > > but
> > > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > > continue; three would be better.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > > now
> > > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > > better
> > > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > > Who
> > > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > > on from Java 8.
> > > >
> > > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > > can
> > > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > > >
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > > here?
> > > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > > much
> > > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > > contributors
> > > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > > >
> > > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > > >
> > > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > > Let's
> > > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > > release
> > > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > > >
> > > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > > >
> > > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > > >
> > > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > > test
> > > > > a
> > > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > > >
> > > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > > tests
> > > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > > releases.
> > > > >
> > > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > > codebase
> > > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > > >
> > > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > > ecosystems
> > > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > > works.
> > > > >
> > > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > > easily
> > > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > > avoid
> > > > > > the attic yet.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > > is
> > > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > > contributors more easily.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > >
> > >

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi Geoff,

To Geoff and others, happy new year :)

Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.

So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
new alternative, ...).

Regards
JB

On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi JB
>
> It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
>
> Belated Happy New Year to all.
>
> Regards
> Geoff
>
>
>
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> >
> > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > want to be involved anymore.
> >
> > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> >
> > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> >
> > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > thread.
> >
> > Happy new year to all,
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > >
> > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > significantly
> > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > >
> > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > >
> > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > that
> > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > >
> > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > (becoming
> > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > but
> > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > continue; three would be better.
> > >
> > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > now
> > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > better
> > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > Who
> > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > on from Java 8.
> > >
> > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > can
> > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > >
> > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > >
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > here?
> > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > >
> > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > much
> > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > contributors
> > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > >
> > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > >
> > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > Let's
> > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > release
> > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > >
> > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > >
> > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > >
> > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > test
> > > > a
> > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > >
> > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > tests
> > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > releases.
> > > >
> > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > codebase
> > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > >
> > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > ecosystems
> > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > works.
> > > >
> > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > easily
> > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > avoid
> > > > > the attic yet.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > is
> > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > >
> > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > contributors more easily.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > >
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi Geoff,

To Geoff and others, happy new year :)

Yes, I agree: it seems the bandwidth is limited.

So, I think it makes sense to move jclouds into attic; and let other
projects find an alternative (forking part of jclouds, finding a brand
new alternative, ...).

Regards
JB

On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:28 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi JB
>
> It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
> contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
> seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
> to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.
>
> Belated Happy New Year to all.
>
> Regards
> Geoff
>
>
>
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
> >
> > I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> > standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> > want to be involved anymore.
> >
> > As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> > only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
> >
> > So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> > 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> > PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> > still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> > important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> > jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> > 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> > approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> > 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> > actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> > code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
> >
> > My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> > thread.
> >
> > Happy new year to all,
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> > >
> > > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> > significantly
> > > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> > >
> > > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> > >
> > > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> > that
> > > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> > >
> > > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> > (becoming
> > > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> > but
> > > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > > continue; three would be better.
> > >
> > > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> > now
> > > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> > better
> > > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> > Who
> > > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > > on from Java 8.
> > >
> > > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> > can
> > > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> > >
> > > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> > >
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> > here?
> > > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > > >
> > > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> > much
> > > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > > contributors
> > > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > > >
> > > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > > >
> > > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > > Let's
> > > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> > release
> > > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > > >
> > > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > > >
> > > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > > >
> > > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> > test
> > > > a
> > > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > > >
> > > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> > tests
> > > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > > releases.
> > > >
> > > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> > codebase
> > > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > > >
> > > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> > ecosystems
> > > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> > works.
> > > >
> > > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> > easily
> > > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> > avoid
> > > > > the attic yet.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> > is
> > > > no one left to do this work.
> > > >
> > > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > > contributors more easily.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > >
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Hi JB

It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.

Belated Happy New Year to all.

Regards
Geoff



On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
>
> I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> want to be involved anymore.
>
> As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
>
> So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
>
> My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> thread.
>
> Happy new year to all,
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> >
> > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> significantly
> > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> >
> > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> >
> > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> that
> > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> >
> > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> (becoming
> > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> but
> > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > continue; three would be better.
> >
> > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> now
> > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> better
> > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> Who
> > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > on from Java 8.
> >
> > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> can
> > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> >
> > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> >
> > Geoff
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> here?
> > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > >
> > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> much
> > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > >
> > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > contributors
> > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > >
> > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > >
> > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > Let's
> > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> release
> > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > >
> > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > >
> > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > >
> > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> test
> > > a
> > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > >
> > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> tests
> > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > releases.
> > >
> > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> codebase
> > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > >
> > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> ecosystems
> > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> works.
> > >
> > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> easily
> > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> avoid
> > > > the attic yet.
> > >
> > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> is
> > > no one left to do this work.
> > >
> > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > contributors more easily.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Gaul
> > > http://gaul.org/
> > >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Hi JB

It appears that we don't have the collective bandwidth to add new active
contributors to the project, so, sadly, moving jclouds to the attic does
seem to be the right thing to do. It will be up to each downstream project
to figure out what it wants to do in consequence.

Belated Happy New Year to all.

Regards
Geoff



On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 at 05:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)
>
> I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
> standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
> want to be involved anymore.
>
> As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
> only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.
>
> So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
> 1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
> PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
> still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
> important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
> jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
> 2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
> approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
> 3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
> actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
> code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.
>
> My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this
> thread.
>
> Happy new year to all,
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
> >
> > Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> > effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> > Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps
> significantly
> > longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> > period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
> >
> > So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> > discussion (have I missed anyone?):
> >
> > Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for
> that
> > matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
> >
> > 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> > continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> > time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward
> (becoming
> > a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined,
> but
> > also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> > problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> > continue; three would be better.
> >
> > 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> > the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is
> now
> > the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be
> better
> > directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> > from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> > JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction.
> Who
> > knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> > on from Java 8.
> >
> > Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds,
> can
> > I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
> >
> > Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
> >
> > Geoff
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required
> here?
> > > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > > >
> > > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing
> much
> > > > fresh feature development on it:
> > > >
> > > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > > contributors
> > > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> > >
> > > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> > >
> > > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > > Let's
> > > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> release
> > > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> > >
> > > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> > >
> > > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> > >
> > > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to
> test
> > > a
> > > > release? How expensive is it?
> > >
> > > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken
> tests
> > > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > > releases.
> > >
> > > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the
> codebase
> > > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> > >
> > > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud
> ecosystems
> > > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all
> works.
> > >
> > > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more
> easily
> > > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may
> avoid
> > > > the attic yet.
> > >
> > > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there
> is
> > > no one left to do this work.
> > >
> > > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > > contributors more easily.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Gaul
> > > http://gaul.org/
> > >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi,

Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)

I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
want to be involved anymore.

As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.

So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.

My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this thread.

Happy new year to all,
Regards
JB

On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
>
> Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps significantly
> longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
>
> So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> discussion (have I missed anyone?):
>
> Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for that
> matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
>
> 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward (becoming
> a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined, but
> also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> continue; three would be better.
>
> 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is now
> the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be better
> directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction. Who
> knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> on from Java 8.
>
> Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds, can
> I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
>
> Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required here?
> > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > >
> > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing much
> > > fresh feature development on it:
> > >
> > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > contributors
> > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> >
> > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> >
> > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > Let's
> > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a release
> > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> >
> > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> >
> > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> >
> > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to test
> > a
> > > release? How expensive is it?
> >
> > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken tests
> > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > releases.
> >
> > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the codebase
> > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> >
> > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud ecosystems
> > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all works.
> >
> > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more easily
> > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may avoid
> > > the attic yet.
> >
> > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there is
> > no one left to do this work.
> >
> > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > contributors more easily.
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi,

Sorry to have been quiet, I'm "half off" for festive time ;)

I'm still interested in helping maintain jclouds from a community
standpoint. However, clearly, the current committers/PMC members don't
want to be involved anymore.

As most of the volunteers are not jclouds PMC members (I think I'm the
only one), you have to accept the decision from PMC members.

So, I see only three options for the projects using jclouds:
1. current PMC members accept to extend/expand the committer list (and
PMC) to have new people volunteer to maintain jclouds, so projects can
still use jclouds. I don't want to be pushy in this direction. It's
important to have the long time PMC members, if they want to move
jclouds in the attic, it's fair and we have to accept that.
2. replace jclouds with something else. That's probably the preferred
approach, replacing jclouds directly with cloud providers APIs.
3. fork jclouds (or part of jclouds) in other projects (the part
actually used in the project). For instance, we can imagine having
code from jclouds moved/forked in brooklyn.

My prefered option is probably 2, according to the discussion in this thread.

Happy new year to all,
Regards
JB

On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:11 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Hope you had a restful Christmas break.
>
> Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
> effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
> Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps significantly
> longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
> period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.
>
> So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
> discussion (have I missed anyone?):
>
> Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for that
> matter who hasn't yet spoken up.
>
> 1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
> continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
> time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward (becoming
> a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined, but
> also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
> problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
> continue; three would be better.
>
> 2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
> the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is now
> the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be better
> directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
> from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
> JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction. Who
> knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
> on from Java 8.
>
> Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds, can
> I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.
>
> Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required here?
> > > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> > >
> > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing much
> > > fresh feature development on it:
> > >
> > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> > contributors
> > > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > > occasional important bug fixes)?
> >
> > Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> > jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> > keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> > jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> > should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
> >
> > > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> > Let's
> > > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a release
> > > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> >
> > I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
> >
> > * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> > * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> > * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> > * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> > * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> > * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
> >
> > > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to test
> > a
> > > release? How expensive is it?
> >
> > I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> > tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> > compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken tests
> > which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> > releases.
> >
> > > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the codebase
> > > well enough to contribute effectively?
> >
> > jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> > (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> > which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> > could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> > makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> > debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> > on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> > question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud ecosystems
> > and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all works.
> >
> > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more easily
> > > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may avoid
> > > the attic yet.
> >
> > I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> > motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> > currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> > to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there is
> > no one left to do this work.
> >
> > I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> > against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> > jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> > the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> > similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> > multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> > contributors more easily.
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Hi all,

Hope you had a restful Christmas break.

Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps significantly
longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.

So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
discussion (have I missed anyone?):

Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for that
matter who hasn't yet spoken up.

1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward (becoming
a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined, but
also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
continue; three would be better.

2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is now
the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be better
directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction. Who
knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
on from Java 8.

Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds, can
I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.

Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.

Geoff




On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required here?
> > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> >
> > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing much
> > fresh feature development on it:
> >
> > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> contributors
> > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > occasional important bug fixes)?
>
> Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
>
> > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> Let's
> > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a release
> > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
>
> I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
>
> * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
>
> > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to test
> a
> > release? How expensive is it?
>
> I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken tests
> which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> releases.
>
> > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the codebase
> > well enough to contribute effectively?
>
> jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud ecosystems
> and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all works.
>
> > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more easily
> > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may avoid
> > the attic yet.
>
> I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there is
> no one left to do this work.
>
> I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> contributors more easily.
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Hi all,

Hope you had a restful Christmas break.

Andrew, thanks very much for these details, that is helpful to scope the
effort required to maintain jclouds. Of course what takes 10 hours for
Andrew, with his familiarity with jclouds, will take perhaps significantly
longer for those of us who are not yet familiar, even after an initial
period of learning. You'll each have your own estimations I'm sure.

So - two questions to everyone who has expressed an interest in this
discussion (have I missed anyone?):

Alex, Andrey, Enrico, Francois, JB, Juan, Iuliana, and anyone else for that
matter who hasn't yet spoken up.

1. Who among us feels strongly enough about their need for jclouds to
continue business as usual that they want to volunteer to commit to the
time it will take to learn it and then maintain it going forward (becoming
a committer)? This would not only include releases, as Andrew outlined, but
also security fixes, and maintenance as dependencies age (e.g. that gson
problem). It seems to me we need *at least* two volunteers for jclouds to
continue; three would be better.

2. Or do you agree with Andrew that avoiding the attic doesn't need to be
the goal? That everything has a natural lifetime and maybe the attic is now
the right course for jclouds? Perhaps you feel your effort would be better
directed toward adapting your own code to a world without jclouds. E.g.
from a Brooklyn point of view maybe the time is near for replacing
JCloudLocation with provider specific locations, or a new abstraction. Who
knows, that might even remove a slew of dependencies and assist us moving
on from Java 8.

Concretely: if you want to volunteer to commit to maintaining jclouds, can
I ask you please to reply to this email to say so.

Kind regards to all, and wishing you a Happy New Year.

Geoff




On Sun, 25 Dec 2022 at 01:12, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required here?
> > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> >
> > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing much
> > fresh feature development on it:
> >
> > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> contributors
> > to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> > occasional important bug fixes)?
>
> Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
> jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
> keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
> jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
> should maintain the project with some domain expertise.
>
> > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> Let's
> > separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a release
> > from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
>
> I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:
>
> * triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
> * reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
> * running integration tests (~1 hour)
> * dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
> * Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
> * fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)
>
> > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to test
> a
> > release? How expensive is it?
>
> I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
> tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
> compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken tests
> which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
> releases.
>
> > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the codebase
> > well enough to contribute effectively?
>
> jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
> (RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
> which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
> could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
> makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
> debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
> on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
> question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud ecosystems
> and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all works.
>
> > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more easily
> > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may avoid
> > the attic yet.
>
> I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
> motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
> currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
> to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there is
> no one left to do this work.
>
> I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
> against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
> jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
> the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
> similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
> multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
> contributors more easily.
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required here?
> Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> 
> If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing much
> fresh feature development on it:
> 
> 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active contributors
> to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> occasional important bug fixes)?

Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
should maintain the project with some domain expertise.

> 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment). Let's
> separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a release
> from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.

I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:

* triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
* reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
* running integration tests (~1 hour)
* dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
* Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
* fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)

> 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to test a
> release? How expensive is it?

I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken tests
which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
releases.

> 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the codebase
> well enough to contribute effectively?

jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
(RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud ecosystems
and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all works.

> I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more easily
> ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may avoid
> the attic yet.

I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there is
no one left to do this work.

I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
contributors more easily.

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 03:25:04PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required here?
> Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
> 
> If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing much
> fresh feature development on it:
> 
> 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active contributors
> to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
> occasional important bug fixes)?

Apache projects need a quorum of 3 committers to make a release which
jclouds will soon lack.  Mechanically, a single motivated person could
keep pushing releases with a few drive-by +1s.  But practically, the
jclouds blobstore and compute scope is large enough that two people
should maintain the project with some domain expertise.

> 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment). Let's
> separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a release
> from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.

I estimate that I spend 10 hours per release:

* triaging blobstore issues (~1 hour)
* reviewing/pushing forward outstanding PRs (~2 hours)
* running integration tests (~1 hour)
* dealing with jclouds tech debt and breakages (0-10 hours?)
* Apache process and overhead (~1 hour)
* fixes that help my project or look easy (? hours)

> 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to test a
> release? How expensive is it?

I have access to all the major blobstore providers and run integration
tests for them.  I estimate this costs me less than $1 but running
compute tests may cost more.  Note that there are flaky and broken tests
which require some judgment call so I only look at the diff between
releases.

> 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the codebase
> well enough to contribute effectively?

jclouds is a big project that uses a custom annotation mechanism
(RestAnnotationProcessor) and extensively (excessively?) uses Guice
which makes it hard for many people (including me!) to understand.  We
could debate the merits of the technical approach but socially this
makes it hard to attract contributors.  I also think that the technical
debt that jclouds has accrued generally makes it less pleasant to work
on than simpler or newer projects.  I don't think this answers your
question but Ignasi and I now work outside the Java and cloud ecosystems
and are not in a good position to explain/rediscover how this all works.

> I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more easily
> ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may avoid
> the attic yet.

I don't know that avoiding the attic should be the goal.  If there are
motivated people that want to continue jclouds then please do so.  But
currently no one is doing any work towards this end.  jclouds continues
to accrue technical debt (e.g., gson 2.9.0 incompatibility) and there is
no one left to do this work.

I think it would be good for a new contributor to step back and compare
against similar multi-cloud projects like libcloud to evaluate what
jclouds does well and what it does not.  I suspect that reimplementing
the REST APIs is not a good choice in 2022 and instead jclouds or a
similar library should reuse the vendor SDKs and focus only on
multi-cloud portability.  And simplify the project so users can become
contributors more easily.

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi Andrey,

Side note, I think we could be interested by Apache Sunny (it's a Java
stack/runtime/deployer for the cloud, not really a library, more a
runtime focusing on Kubernetes).

As it seems your use case is Karaf focus, another option is to
contribute to Karaf (and probably Cellar).

I think you are in the situation I mentioned in my previous email: you
are using jclouds as "key" dependency and so without jclouds, we have
to find other approaches/options.

I'm puzzled as I understand jclouds guys' standpoint, and also the
jclouds users one ;)

Regards
JB


On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 7:05 PM Andrey Rusev <a....@mishmash.io> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't know if I will be really helping here, but I thought ... as the conversation is shifting towards 'will there be volunteers to join' ... I might share my perspective here, as someone who has been observing this mail list (and also this thread) for years... Quietly observing, that is :)
>
> We have a few use cases around here for a java-to-any cloud lib (I can share more details on this if anyone is interested?), but I've honestly during that time I've been warming up and cooling down on the idea of using jclouds. Not a bad idea, if you ask me, but then the 'native' libs usually take over, so we don't use jclouds currently (it's actually not that difficult for us to plug some custom, per-cloud logic into karaf - which is what we use a lot).
>
> On the other hand - I'm also super keen on working on better integration between Apache projects, say, for example, one thing we might be interested in is adding Apache Ozone support to jclouds (I don't see it in the list on the official web?), plus a few more 'compute' providers that we use around here. And I can also bring a couple of guys to this too, if needed. Far from the idea that we can start doing PR reviews straight away, but we can volunteer some development effort if it fits our use cases - say, provisioning networks (and not just buckets and computes) might also be a fit...
>
> But at the same time - I do still kinda struggle (that is - for the use cases we have around here) - with the question of 'why not use the official libs instead?'. And in that sense, in my opinion, it really comes down to - who are the users of jclouds, and are there any potential new uses for it... And if there are - it will be worth supporting jclouds.
>
> Don't know if I managed to explain my view clearly, happy to answer questions you might have... And ... sort of, really hoping I can be of any help here. :)
>
> Cheers,
> A
>
>
>  ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 18:59:39 +0200  Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote ---
>  > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
>  > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
>  > issue there.
>  >
>  > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
>  > retire the project.
>  >
>  > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
>  > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
>  > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
>  > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
>  > "welcoming".
>  > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or not.
>  >
>  > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
>  > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
>  >
>  > Regards
>  > JB
>  >
>  >
>  > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera nacx@apache.org> wrote:
>  > >
>  > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
>  > >
>  > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
>  > > >
>  > >
>  > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
>  > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
>  > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
>  > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
>  > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!
>  >

Re: ExtMsg: Re: move jclouds to the attic?

["Dancy, Chris" <Ch...@pega.com>]

> Actually, I think I can just go ahead and give you a few more examples of what we need

It's actually very easy to use the jclouds framework to wire up your own clients and do really whatever you want. I do this very successfully with the below projects as well as some internal projects here for working with various service API's.

https://github.com/cdancy/bitbucket-rest
https://github.com/cdancy/jenkins-rest




________________________________
From: Andrey Rusev <a....@mishmash.io>
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2022 1:25 PM
To: dev <de...@jclouds.apache.org>
Cc: jb <jb...@nanthrax.net>; dev <de...@brooklyn.apache.org>
Subject: ExtMsg: Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[You don't often get email from a.rusev@mishmash.io. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]

CAUTION: This email was sent from an EXTERNAL source. Think before clicking links or opening attachments.


Actually, I think I can just go ahead and give you a few more examples of what we need ... in general... and I think might be a good fit to jclouds, not sure if you guys think jclouds is the right place for this, but... if you do - I'd be happy to support the development for these... They're generally karaf-related too, but I'll share them here:

- Hot deploy to karaf instances from buckets (on any cloud)
- Unified way of accessing VM metadata services (again, at the end - we'll be using this inside karaf) - for reasons like auto configuration, automating some processes happening inside our code, automated discovery of other karaf instances launched as a cluster (this involves the use of more cloud APIs - beyond buckets and computes), etc...

These are just a couple of examples where we currently have some custom implementations, but I would be happy to release them as open source, either in jclouds or some other project... At the moment I don't necessarily know what would be the best place for them (as open source) - will it be jclouds or karaf or something else ... but still sharing it here in case it will be useful to you too...

Cheers,
A

 ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 20:05:47 +0200  Andrey Rusev  wrote ---
 > Hi,
 >
 > I don't know if I will be really helping here, but I thought ... as the conversation is shifting towards 'will there be volunteers to join' ... I might share my perspective here, as someone who has been observing this mail list (and also this thread) for years... Quietly observing, that is :)
 >
 > We have a few use cases around here for a java-to-any cloud lib (I can share more details on this if anyone is interested?), but I've honestly during that time I've been warming up and cooling down on the idea of using jclouds. Not a bad idea, if you ask me, but then the 'native' libs usually take over, so we don't use jclouds currently (it's actually not that difficult for us to plug some custom, per-cloud logic into karaf - which is what we use a lot).
 >
 > On the other hand - I'm also super keen on working on better integration between Apache projects, say, for example, one thing we might be interested in is adding Apache Ozone support to jclouds (I don't see it in the list on the official web?), plus a few more 'compute' providers that we use around here. And I can also bring a couple of guys to this too, if needed. Far from the idea that we can start doing PR reviews straight away, but we can volunteer some development effort if it fits our use cases - say, provisioning networks (and not just buckets and computes) might also be a fit...
 >
 > But at the same time - I do still kinda struggle (that is - for the use cases we have around here) - with the question of 'why not use the official libs instead?'. And in that sense, in my opinion, it really comes down to - who are the users of jclouds, and are there any potential new uses for it... And if there are - it will be worth supporting jclouds.
 >
 > Don't know if I managed to explain my view clearly, happy to answer questions you might have... And ... sort of, really hoping I can be of any help here. :)
 >
 > Cheers,
 > A
 >
 >
 >  ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 18:59:39 +0200  Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote ---
 >  > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
 >  > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
 >  > issue there.
 >  >
 >  > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
 >  > retire the project.
 >  >
 >  > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
 >  > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
 >  > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
 >  > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
 >  > "welcoming".
 >  > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or not.
 >  >
 >  > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
 >  > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
 >  >
 >  > Regards
 >  > JB
 >  >
 >  >
 >  > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera nacx@apache.org> wrote:
 >  > >
 >  > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
 >  > >
 >  > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
 >  > > >
 >  > >
 >  > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
 >  > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
 >  > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
 >  > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
 >  > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
 >  > >
 >  > >
 >  > >
 >  > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!
 >  >
 >

Re: ExtMsg: Re: move jclouds to the attic?

["Dancy, Chris" <Ch...@pega.com>]

> Actually, I think I can just go ahead and give you a few more examples of what we need

It's actually very easy to use the jclouds framework to wire up your own clients and do really whatever you want. I do this very successfully with the below projects as well as some internal projects here for working with various service API's.

https://github.com/cdancy/bitbucket-rest
https://github.com/cdancy/jenkins-rest




________________________________
From: Andrey Rusev <a....@mishmash.io>
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2022 1:25 PM
To: dev <de...@jclouds.apache.org>
Cc: jb <jb...@nanthrax.net>; dev <de...@brooklyn.apache.org>
Subject: ExtMsg: Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[You don't often get email from a.rusev@mishmash.io. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]

CAUTION: This email was sent from an EXTERNAL source. Think before clicking links or opening attachments.


Actually, I think I can just go ahead and give you a few more examples of what we need ... in general... and I think might be a good fit to jclouds, not sure if you guys think jclouds is the right place for this, but... if you do - I'd be happy to support the development for these... They're generally karaf-related too, but I'll share them here:

- Hot deploy to karaf instances from buckets (on any cloud)
- Unified way of accessing VM metadata services (again, at the end - we'll be using this inside karaf) - for reasons like auto configuration, automating some processes happening inside our code, automated discovery of other karaf instances launched as a cluster (this involves the use of more cloud APIs - beyond buckets and computes), etc...

These are just a couple of examples where we currently have some custom implementations, but I would be happy to release them as open source, either in jclouds or some other project... At the moment I don't necessarily know what would be the best place for them (as open source) - will it be jclouds or karaf or something else ... but still sharing it here in case it will be useful to you too...

Cheers,
A

 ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 20:05:47 +0200  Andrey Rusev  wrote ---
 > Hi,
 >
 > I don't know if I will be really helping here, but I thought ... as the conversation is shifting towards 'will there be volunteers to join' ... I might share my perspective here, as someone who has been observing this mail list (and also this thread) for years... Quietly observing, that is :)
 >
 > We have a few use cases around here for a java-to-any cloud lib (I can share more details on this if anyone is interested?), but I've honestly during that time I've been warming up and cooling down on the idea of using jclouds. Not a bad idea, if you ask me, but then the 'native' libs usually take over, so we don't use jclouds currently (it's actually not that difficult for us to plug some custom, per-cloud logic into karaf - which is what we use a lot).
 >
 > On the other hand - I'm also super keen on working on better integration between Apache projects, say, for example, one thing we might be interested in is adding Apache Ozone support to jclouds (I don't see it in the list on the official web?), plus a few more 'compute' providers that we use around here. And I can also bring a couple of guys to this too, if needed. Far from the idea that we can start doing PR reviews straight away, but we can volunteer some development effort if it fits our use cases - say, provisioning networks (and not just buckets and computes) might also be a fit...
 >
 > But at the same time - I do still kinda struggle (that is - for the use cases we have around here) - with the question of 'why not use the official libs instead?'. And in that sense, in my opinion, it really comes down to - who are the users of jclouds, and are there any potential new uses for it... And if there are - it will be worth supporting jclouds.
 >
 > Don't know if I managed to explain my view clearly, happy to answer questions you might have... And ... sort of, really hoping I can be of any help here. :)
 >
 > Cheers,
 > A
 >
 >
 >  ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 18:59:39 +0200  Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote ---
 >  > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
 >  > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
 >  > issue there.
 >  >
 >  > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
 >  > retire the project.
 >  >
 >  > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
 >  > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
 >  > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
 >  > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
 >  > "welcoming".
 >  > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or not.
 >  >
 >  > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
 >  > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
 >  >
 >  > Regards
 >  > JB
 >  >
 >  >
 >  > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera nacx@apache.org> wrote:
 >  > >
 >  > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
 >  > >
 >  > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
 >  > > >
 >  > >
 >  > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
 >  > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
 >  > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
 >  > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
 >  > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
 >  > >
 >  > >
 >  > >
 >  > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!
 >  >
 >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrey Rusev <a....@mishmash.io>]

Actually, I think I can just go ahead and give you a few more examples of what we need ... in general... and I think might be a good fit to jclouds, not sure if you guys think jclouds is the right place for this, but... if you do - I'd be happy to support the development for these... They're generally karaf-related too, but I'll share them here:

- Hot deploy to karaf instances from buckets (on any cloud)
- Unified way of accessing VM metadata services (again, at the end - we'll be using this inside karaf) - for reasons like auto configuration, automating some processes happening inside our code, automated discovery of other karaf instances launched as a cluster (this involves the use of more cloud APIs - beyond buckets and computes), etc...

These are just a couple of examples where we currently have some custom implementations, but I would be happy to release them as open source, either in jclouds or some other project... At the moment I don't necessarily know what would be the best place for them (as open source) - will it be jclouds or karaf or something else ... but still sharing it here in case it will be useful to you too...

Cheers,
A

 ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 20:05:47 +0200  Andrey Rusev  wrote --- 
 > Hi,
 > 
 > I don't know if I will be really helping here, but I thought ... as the conversation is shifting towards 'will there be volunteers to join' ... I might share my perspective here, as someone who has been observing this mail list (and also this thread) for years... Quietly observing, that is :)
 > 
 > We have a few use cases around here for a java-to-any cloud lib (I can share more details on this if anyone is interested?), but I've honestly during that time I've been warming up and cooling down on the idea of using jclouds. Not a bad idea, if you ask me, but then the 'native' libs usually take over, so we don't use jclouds currently (it's actually not that difficult for us to plug some custom, per-cloud logic into karaf - which is what we use a lot).
 > 
 > On the other hand - I'm also super keen on working on better integration between Apache projects, say, for example, one thing we might be interested in is adding Apache Ozone support to jclouds (I don't see it in the list on the official web?), plus a few more 'compute' providers that we use around here. And I can also bring a couple of guys to this too, if needed. Far from the idea that we can start doing PR reviews straight away, but we can volunteer some development effort if it fits our use cases - say, provisioning networks (and not just buckets and computes) might also be a fit...
 > 
 > But at the same time - I do still kinda struggle (that is - for the use cases we have around here) - with the question of 'why not use the official libs instead?'. And in that sense, in my opinion, it really comes down to - who are the users of jclouds, and are there any potential new uses for it... And if there are - it will be worth supporting jclouds.
 > 
 > Don't know if I managed to explain my view clearly, happy to answer questions you might have... And ... sort of, really hoping I can be of any help here. :)
 > 
 > Cheers,
 > A
 > 
 > 
 >  ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 18:59:39 +0200  Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote --- 
 >  > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
 >  > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
 >  > issue there.
 >  > 
 >  > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
 >  > retire the project.
 >  > 
 >  > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
 >  > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
 >  > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
 >  > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
 >  > "welcoming".
 >  > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or not.
 >  > 
 >  > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
 >  > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
 >  > 
 >  > Regards
 >  > JB
 >  > 
 >  > 
 >  > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera nacx@apache.org> wrote:
 >  > >
 >  > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
 >  > >
 >  > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
 >  > > >
 >  > >
 >  > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
 >  > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
 >  > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
 >  > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
 >  > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
 >  > >
 >  > >
 >  > >
 >  > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!
 >  > 
 > 

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi Andrey,

Side note, I think we could be interested by Apache Sunny (it's a Java
stack/runtime/deployer for the cloud, not really a library, more a
runtime focusing on Kubernetes).

As it seems your use case is Karaf focus, another option is to
contribute to Karaf (and probably Cellar).

I think you are in the situation I mentioned in my previous email: you
are using jclouds as "key" dependency and so without jclouds, we have
to find other approaches/options.

I'm puzzled as I understand jclouds guys' standpoint, and also the
jclouds users one ;)

Regards
JB


On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 7:05 PM Andrey Rusev <a....@mishmash.io> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't know if I will be really helping here, but I thought ... as the conversation is shifting towards 'will there be volunteers to join' ... I might share my perspective here, as someone who has been observing this mail list (and also this thread) for years... Quietly observing, that is :)
>
> We have a few use cases around here for a java-to-any cloud lib (I can share more details on this if anyone is interested?), but I've honestly during that time I've been warming up and cooling down on the idea of using jclouds. Not a bad idea, if you ask me, but then the 'native' libs usually take over, so we don't use jclouds currently (it's actually not that difficult for us to plug some custom, per-cloud logic into karaf - which is what we use a lot).
>
> On the other hand - I'm also super keen on working on better integration between Apache projects, say, for example, one thing we might be interested in is adding Apache Ozone support to jclouds (I don't see it in the list on the official web?), plus a few more 'compute' providers that we use around here. And I can also bring a couple of guys to this too, if needed. Far from the idea that we can start doing PR reviews straight away, but we can volunteer some development effort if it fits our use cases - say, provisioning networks (and not just buckets and computes) might also be a fit...
>
> But at the same time - I do still kinda struggle (that is - for the use cases we have around here) - with the question of 'why not use the official libs instead?'. And in that sense, in my opinion, it really comes down to - who are the users of jclouds, and are there any potential new uses for it... And if there are - it will be worth supporting jclouds.
>
> Don't know if I managed to explain my view clearly, happy to answer questions you might have... And ... sort of, really hoping I can be of any help here. :)
>
> Cheers,
> A
>
>
>  ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 18:59:39 +0200  Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote ---
>  > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
>  > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
>  > issue there.
>  >
>  > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
>  > retire the project.
>  >
>  > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
>  > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
>  > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
>  > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
>  > "welcoming".
>  > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or not.
>  >
>  > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
>  > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
>  >
>  > Regards
>  > JB
>  >
>  >
>  > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera nacx@apache.org> wrote:
>  > >
>  > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
>  > >
>  > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
>  > > >
>  > >
>  > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
>  > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
>  > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
>  > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
>  > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!
>  >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrey Rusev <a....@mishmash.io>]

Actually, I think I can just go ahead and give you a few more examples of what we need ... in general... and I think might be a good fit to jclouds, not sure if you guys think jclouds is the right place for this, but... if you do - I'd be happy to support the development for these... They're generally karaf-related too, but I'll share them here:

- Hot deploy to karaf instances from buckets (on any cloud)
- Unified way of accessing VM metadata services (again, at the end - we'll be using this inside karaf) - for reasons like auto configuration, automating some processes happening inside our code, automated discovery of other karaf instances launched as a cluster (this involves the use of more cloud APIs - beyond buckets and computes), etc...

These are just a couple of examples where we currently have some custom implementations, but I would be happy to release them as open source, either in jclouds or some other project... At the moment I don't necessarily know what would be the best place for them (as open source) - will it be jclouds or karaf or something else ... but still sharing it here in case it will be useful to you too...

Cheers,
A

 ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 20:05:47 +0200  Andrey Rusev  wrote --- 
 > Hi,
 > 
 > I don't know if I will be really helping here, but I thought ... as the conversation is shifting towards 'will there be volunteers to join' ... I might share my perspective here, as someone who has been observing this mail list (and also this thread) for years... Quietly observing, that is :)
 > 
 > We have a few use cases around here for a java-to-any cloud lib (I can share more details on this if anyone is interested?), but I've honestly during that time I've been warming up and cooling down on the idea of using jclouds. Not a bad idea, if you ask me, but then the 'native' libs usually take over, so we don't use jclouds currently (it's actually not that difficult for us to plug some custom, per-cloud logic into karaf - which is what we use a lot).
 > 
 > On the other hand - I'm also super keen on working on better integration between Apache projects, say, for example, one thing we might be interested in is adding Apache Ozone support to jclouds (I don't see it in the list on the official web?), plus a few more 'compute' providers that we use around here. And I can also bring a couple of guys to this too, if needed. Far from the idea that we can start doing PR reviews straight away, but we can volunteer some development effort if it fits our use cases - say, provisioning networks (and not just buckets and computes) might also be a fit...
 > 
 > But at the same time - I do still kinda struggle (that is - for the use cases we have around here) - with the question of 'why not use the official libs instead?'. And in that sense, in my opinion, it really comes down to - who are the users of jclouds, and are there any potential new uses for it... And if there are - it will be worth supporting jclouds.
 > 
 > Don't know if I managed to explain my view clearly, happy to answer questions you might have... And ... sort of, really hoping I can be of any help here. :)
 > 
 > Cheers,
 > A
 > 
 > 
 >  ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 18:59:39 +0200  Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote --- 
 >  > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
 >  > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
 >  > issue there.
 >  > 
 >  > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
 >  > retire the project.
 >  > 
 >  > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
 >  > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
 >  > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
 >  > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
 >  > "welcoming".
 >  > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or not.
 >  > 
 >  > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
 >  > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
 >  > 
 >  > Regards
 >  > JB
 >  > 
 >  > 
 >  > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera nacx@apache.org> wrote:
 >  > >
 >  > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
 >  > >
 >  > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
 >  > > >
 >  > >
 >  > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
 >  > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
 >  > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
 >  > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
 >  > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
 >  > >
 >  > >
 >  > >
 >  > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!
 >  > 
 > 

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrey Rusev <a....@mishmash.io>]

Hi,

I don't know if I will be really helping here, but I thought ... as the conversation is shifting towards 'will there be volunteers to join' ... I might share my perspective here, as someone who has been observing this mail list (and also this thread) for years... Quietly observing, that is :)

We have a few use cases around here for a java-to-any cloud lib (I can share more details on this if anyone is interested?), but I've honestly during that time I've been warming up and cooling down on the idea of using jclouds. Not a bad idea, if you ask me, but then the 'native' libs usually take over, so we don't use jclouds currently (it's actually not that difficult for us to plug some custom, per-cloud logic into karaf - which is what we use a lot).

On the other hand - I'm also super keen on working on better integration between Apache projects, say, for example, one thing we might be interested in is adding Apache Ozone support to jclouds (I don't see it in the list on the official web?), plus a few more 'compute' providers that we use around here. And I can also bring a couple of guys to this too, if needed. Far from the idea that we can start doing PR reviews straight away, but we can volunteer some development effort if it fits our use cases - say, provisioning networks (and not just buckets and computes) might also be a fit...

But at the same time - I do still kinda struggle (that is - for the use cases we have around here) - with the question of 'why not use the official libs instead?'. And in that sense, in my opinion, it really comes down to - who are the users of jclouds, and are there any potential new uses for it... And if there are - it will be worth supporting jclouds.

Don't know if I managed to explain my view clearly, happy to answer questions you might have... And ... sort of, really hoping I can be of any help here. :)

Cheers,
A


 ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 18:59:39 +0200  Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote --- 
 > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
 > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
 > issue there.
 > 
 > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
 > retire the project.
 > 
 > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
 > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
 > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
 > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
 > "welcoming".
 > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or not.
 > 
 > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
 > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
 > 
 > Regards
 > JB
 > 
 > 
 > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera nacx@apache.org> wrote:
 > >
 > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
 > >
 > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
 > > >
 > >
 > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
 > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
 > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
 > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
 > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!
 > 

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrey Rusev <a....@mishmash.io>]

Hi,

I don't know if I will be really helping here, but I thought ... as the conversation is shifting towards 'will there be volunteers to join' ... I might share my perspective here, as someone who has been observing this mail list (and also this thread) for years... Quietly observing, that is :)

We have a few use cases around here for a java-to-any cloud lib (I can share more details on this if anyone is interested?), but I've honestly during that time I've been warming up and cooling down on the idea of using jclouds. Not a bad idea, if you ask me, but then the 'native' libs usually take over, so we don't use jclouds currently (it's actually not that difficult for us to plug some custom, per-cloud logic into karaf - which is what we use a lot).

On the other hand - I'm also super keen on working on better integration between Apache projects, say, for example, one thing we might be interested in is adding Apache Ozone support to jclouds (I don't see it in the list on the official web?), plus a few more 'compute' providers that we use around here. And I can also bring a couple of guys to this too, if needed. Far from the idea that we can start doing PR reviews straight away, but we can volunteer some development effort if it fits our use cases - say, provisioning networks (and not just buckets and computes) might also be a fit...

But at the same time - I do still kinda struggle (that is - for the use cases we have around here) - with the question of 'why not use the official libs instead?'. And in that sense, in my opinion, it really comes down to - who are the users of jclouds, and are there any potential new uses for it... And if there are - it will be worth supporting jclouds.

Don't know if I managed to explain my view clearly, happy to answer questions you might have... And ... sort of, really hoping I can be of any help here. :)

Cheers,
A


 ---- On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 18:59:39 +0200  Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote --- 
 > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
 > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
 > issue there.
 > 
 > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
 > retire the project.
 > 
 > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
 > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
 > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
 > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
 > "welcoming".
 > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or not.
 > 
 > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
 > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
 > 
 > Regards
 > JB
 > 
 > 
 > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera nacx@apache.org> wrote:
 > >
 > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
 > >
 > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
 > > >
 > >
 > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
 > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
 > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
 > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
 > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!
 > 

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

meant to add dev@brooklyn.a.o

On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 at 15:25, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:

> Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required here?
> Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
>
> If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing much
> fresh feature development on it:
>
> 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> contributors to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security
> fixes, occasional important bug fixes)?
> 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> Let's separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> release from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to test a
> release? How expensive is it?
> 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the codebase
> well enough to contribute effectively?
>
> I ask (1) because I think we need to focus on how many new people we need
> to get involved. It seems that the current number of active contributors is
> approximately 1, Andrew, with some time perhaps from Ignasi and others?
> I ask (2) because I think any of us will want to know what we would need
> to do if we volunteer to become an active contributor. (I'm sure I'm not
> the only one who doesn't feel they have a lot of spare time.)
> I ask (3) because any of us may be in the same boat as me - I wouldn't be
> allowed to do any jclouds work using my employer's cloud provider accounts
> or infrastructure, so I would have to use personal accounts. The only ones
> I have personally are AWS and GCP. Would any of us need a wide range of
> provider accounts to test a release? How much would the testing cost? I
> would be reluctant to run a test suite I didn't know on a personal account.
> I'm sure we've all heard stories about nightmare AWS bills...
> Finally (4) gives us an idea of the ramp-up involved. I think we can
> assume that we're all fairly experienced Java devs, or we wouldn't be
> reading this. But say we've never looked into the code yet. Would you or
> others have any time to help bring us up to speed? I did a bit of work on
> jclouds back around 2016 and the way I remember it is that it took a week
> or two to get my head around the bits I needed to know, but it was
> reasonably straightforward, the code wasn't very convoluted. I had to take
> the time to learn about Guava/Guice. But back then I was able to work on it
> in the day job, and had great help learning it from Andrea Turli; thanks
> Andrea ;-)
>
> I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more easily
> ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may avoid
> the attic yet.
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 at 22:28, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Il Sab 10 Dic 2022, 12:47 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> ha
>> scritto:
>>
>> > Ok. Fair enough.
>> >
>> > Imho Karaf-jclouds is probably different as the number of users is very
>> > very thin.
>> >
>> > But I understand your points.
>> >
>> > I will support of moving to attic anyway. Just wanted to give a chance
>> for
>> > the community to speak up.
>> >
>> > The users will find alternatives (maybe forking part of jclouds).
>> >
>>
>> I think that forking jclouds is not a good solution, as you lose all the
>> potential interactions with other users, for instance in case of security
>> issues (cannot inform all the users, share patches in a coodinated way).
>>
>> I understand the points of the people in this thread that are skeptical
>> about adding external people. Probably I would feel the same way.
>>
>> I believe that it is up to the jcloud PMC to decide on the destiny of the
>> project and as JB is saying, users will find their solutions.
>>
>> My 2 cents
>>
>> Enrico
>>
>>
>>
>> > Thanks
>> > Regards
>> > JB
>> >
>> > Le sam. 10 déc. 2022 à 11:34, Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> a écrit
>> :
>> >
>> > > Even if it is maintenance, now it's not time for just good intentions
>> > > (which are very much appreciated), but time for action, and action is
>> not
>> > > there and my confidence in it happening any time soon is very low.
>> > >
>> > > Let me give you a concrete example:
>> > >
>> > > * In 2019, we voted on moving jcloud-karaf under the Apache Karaf
>> project
>> > > [1] because we were not able to maintain the project properly.
>> > > * The last commit in the transferred project [2] is from 2019 (3 years
>> > > back).
>> > > * That project is still in jclouds 2.2.0, whilst jclouds is in 2.6.0;
>> > it's
>> > > still 4 releases behind.
>> > >
>> > > There have been no feature additions, but over 3 years there haven't
>> > > even been maintenance tasks done at all, even just to keep the
>> project up
>> > > to date with upstream jclouds.
>> > >
>> > > Although I appreciate all the good intentions of people volunteering,
>> I
>> > > don't see any action here (as Gaul also requested), and honestly, I
>> think
>> > > repeating the jcloud-karaf story will not do any favor to users. If we
>> > > change the PMC and inactivity continues, jclouds will be even in a
>> worse
>> > > position than it is today: it will keep having an inactive PMC, but
>> > > composed of people that are even less familiar/expert in its codebase.
>> > >
>> > > IMO, if we really care about users, we should see something here
>> beyond
>> > the
>> > > much-appreciated good intentions, because we've tried this route in
>> the
>> > > past and it has not worked.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/30770j9jwcn14vzczzkbhz37g8q2olc6
>> > > [2] https://github.com/apache/karaf-jclouds
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:58 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about
>> "maintenance", I
>> > > > don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
>> > > > As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
>> > > > important dependency in their project.
>> > > >
>> > > > I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng
>> guys
>> > > > (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.
>> > > >
>> > > > Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do
>> in
>> > > > Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards
>> > > > JB
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <
>> > ignasi.barrera@gmail.com>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually
>> stepping
>> > up
>> > > > > and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the
>> project is
>> > > > still
>> > > > > alive or not."
>> > > > > It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of
>> > > inaction
>> > > > > should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> jb@nanthrax.net
>> > >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand
>> this),
>> > > > > > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't
>> see
>> > any
>> > > > > > issue there.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen
>> if we
>> > > > > > retire the project.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
>> > > > > > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take
>> > over, I
>> > > > > > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have
>> new
>> > > > > > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
>> > > > > > "welcoming".
>> > > > > > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is
>> still
>> > > > alive or
>> > > > > > not.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and
>> > then
>> > > > > > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > JB
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens
>> ;)
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project
>> and
>> > > to
>> > > > > > date,
>> > > > > > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
>> > > > > > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is
>> all
>> > > the
>> > > > > > energy
>> > > > > > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for
>> > > > success
>> > > > > > and
>> > > > > > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring
>> the
>> > > > project.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for
>> your
>> > > > > > bandwidth!
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

meant to add dev@brooklyn.a.o

On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 at 15:25, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:

> Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required here?
> Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.
>
> If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing much
> fresh feature development on it:
>
> 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active
> contributors to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security
> fixes, occasional important bug fixes)?
> 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment).
> Let's separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a
> release from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
> 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to test a
> release? How expensive is it?
> 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the codebase
> well enough to contribute effectively?
>
> I ask (1) because I think we need to focus on how many new people we need
> to get involved. It seems that the current number of active contributors is
> approximately 1, Andrew, with some time perhaps from Ignasi and others?
> I ask (2) because I think any of us will want to know what we would need
> to do if we volunteer to become an active contributor. (I'm sure I'm not
> the only one who doesn't feel they have a lot of spare time.)
> I ask (3) because any of us may be in the same boat as me - I wouldn't be
> allowed to do any jclouds work using my employer's cloud provider accounts
> or infrastructure, so I would have to use personal accounts. The only ones
> I have personally are AWS and GCP. Would any of us need a wide range of
> provider accounts to test a release? How much would the testing cost? I
> would be reluctant to run a test suite I didn't know on a personal account.
> I'm sure we've all heard stories about nightmare AWS bills...
> Finally (4) gives us an idea of the ramp-up involved. I think we can
> assume that we're all fairly experienced Java devs, or we wouldn't be
> reading this. But say we've never looked into the code yet. Would you or
> others have any time to help bring us up to speed? I did a bit of work on
> jclouds back around 2016 and the way I remember it is that it took a week
> or two to get my head around the bits I needed to know, but it was
> reasonably straightforward, the code wasn't very convoluted. I had to take
> the time to learn about Guava/Guice. But back then I was able to work on it
> in the day job, and had great help learning it from Andrea Turli; thanks
> Andrea ;-)
>
> I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more easily
> ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may avoid
> the attic yet.
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 at 22:28, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Il Sab 10 Dic 2022, 12:47 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> ha
>> scritto:
>>
>> > Ok. Fair enough.
>> >
>> > Imho Karaf-jclouds is probably different as the number of users is very
>> > very thin.
>> >
>> > But I understand your points.
>> >
>> > I will support of moving to attic anyway. Just wanted to give a chance
>> for
>> > the community to speak up.
>> >
>> > The users will find alternatives (maybe forking part of jclouds).
>> >
>>
>> I think that forking jclouds is not a good solution, as you lose all the
>> potential interactions with other users, for instance in case of security
>> issues (cannot inform all the users, share patches in a coodinated way).
>>
>> I understand the points of the people in this thread that are skeptical
>> about adding external people. Probably I would feel the same way.
>>
>> I believe that it is up to the jcloud PMC to decide on the destiny of the
>> project and as JB is saying, users will find their solutions.
>>
>> My 2 cents
>>
>> Enrico
>>
>>
>>
>> > Thanks
>> > Regards
>> > JB
>> >
>> > Le sam. 10 déc. 2022 à 11:34, Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> a écrit
>> :
>> >
>> > > Even if it is maintenance, now it's not time for just good intentions
>> > > (which are very much appreciated), but time for action, and action is
>> not
>> > > there and my confidence in it happening any time soon is very low.
>> > >
>> > > Let me give you a concrete example:
>> > >
>> > > * In 2019, we voted on moving jcloud-karaf under the Apache Karaf
>> project
>> > > [1] because we were not able to maintain the project properly.
>> > > * The last commit in the transferred project [2] is from 2019 (3 years
>> > > back).
>> > > * That project is still in jclouds 2.2.0, whilst jclouds is in 2.6.0;
>> > it's
>> > > still 4 releases behind.
>> > >
>> > > There have been no feature additions, but over 3 years there haven't
>> > > even been maintenance tasks done at all, even just to keep the
>> project up
>> > > to date with upstream jclouds.
>> > >
>> > > Although I appreciate all the good intentions of people volunteering,
>> I
>> > > don't see any action here (as Gaul also requested), and honestly, I
>> think
>> > > repeating the jcloud-karaf story will not do any favor to users. If we
>> > > change the PMC and inactivity continues, jclouds will be even in a
>> worse
>> > > position than it is today: it will keep having an inactive PMC, but
>> > > composed of people that are even less familiar/expert in its codebase.
>> > >
>> > > IMO, if we really care about users, we should see something here
>> beyond
>> > the
>> > > much-appreciated good intentions, because we've tried this route in
>> the
>> > > past and it has not worked.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/30770j9jwcn14vzczzkbhz37g8q2olc6
>> > > [2] https://github.com/apache/karaf-jclouds
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:58 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about
>> "maintenance", I
>> > > > don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
>> > > > As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
>> > > > important dependency in their project.
>> > > >
>> > > > I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng
>> guys
>> > > > (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.
>> > > >
>> > > > Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do
>> in
>> > > > Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards
>> > > > JB
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <
>> > ignasi.barrera@gmail.com>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually
>> stepping
>> > up
>> > > > > and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the
>> project is
>> > > > still
>> > > > > alive or not."
>> > > > > It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of
>> > > inaction
>> > > > > should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> jb@nanthrax.net
>> > >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand
>> this),
>> > > > > > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't
>> see
>> > any
>> > > > > > issue there.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen
>> if we
>> > > > > > retire the project.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
>> > > > > > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take
>> > over, I
>> > > > > > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have
>> new
>> > > > > > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
>> > > > > > "welcoming".
>> > > > > > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is
>> still
>> > > > alive or
>> > > > > > not.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and
>> > then
>> > > > > > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > JB
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens
>> ;)
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project
>> and
>> > > to
>> > > > > > date,
>> > > > > > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
>> > > > > > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is
>> all
>> > > the
>> > > > > > energy
>> > > > > > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for
>> > > > success
>> > > > > > and
>> > > > > > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring
>> the
>> > > > project.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for
>> your
>> > > > > > bandwidth!
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required here?
Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you.

If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing much
fresh feature development on it:

1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active contributors
to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security fixes,
occasional important bug fixes)?
2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment). Let's
separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a release
from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc.
3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to test a
release? How expensive is it?
4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the codebase
well enough to contribute effectively?

I ask (1) because I think we need to focus on how many new people we need
to get involved. It seems that the current number of active contributors is
approximately 1, Andrew, with some time perhaps from Ignasi and others?
I ask (2) because I think any of us will want to know what we would need to
do if we volunteer to become an active contributor. (I'm sure I'm not the
only one who doesn't feel they have a lot of spare time.)
I ask (3) because any of us may be in the same boat as me - I wouldn't be
allowed to do any jclouds work using my employer's cloud provider accounts
or infrastructure, so I would have to use personal accounts. The only ones
I have personally are AWS and GCP. Would any of us need a wide range of
provider accounts to test a release? How much would the testing cost? I
would be reluctant to run a test suite I didn't know on a personal account.
I'm sure we've all heard stories about nightmare AWS bills...
Finally (4) gives us an idea of the ramp-up involved. I think we can assume
that we're all fairly experienced Java devs, or we wouldn't be reading
this. But say we've never looked into the code yet. Would you or others
have any time to help bring us up to speed? I did a bit of work on jclouds
back around 2016 and the way I remember it is that it took a week or two to
get my head around the bits I needed to know, but it was reasonably
straightforward, the code wasn't very convoluted. I had to take the time to
learn about Guava/Guice. But back then I was able to work on it in the day
job, and had great help learning it from Andrea Turli; thanks Andrea ;-)

I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more easily
ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may avoid
the attic yet.

Geoff













On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 at 22:28, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Il Sab 10 Dic 2022, 12:47 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> ha
> scritto:
>
> > Ok. Fair enough.
> >
> > Imho Karaf-jclouds is probably different as the number of users is very
> > very thin.
> >
> > But I understand your points.
> >
> > I will support of moving to attic anyway. Just wanted to give a chance
> for
> > the community to speak up.
> >
> > The users will find alternatives (maybe forking part of jclouds).
> >
>
> I think that forking jclouds is not a good solution, as you lose all the
> potential interactions with other users, for instance in case of security
> issues (cannot inform all the users, share patches in a coodinated way).
>
> I understand the points of the people in this thread that are skeptical
> about adding external people. Probably I would feel the same way.
>
> I believe that it is up to the jcloud PMC to decide on the destiny of the
> project and as JB is saying, users will find their solutions.
>
> My 2 cents
>
> Enrico
>
>
>
> > Thanks
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > Le sam. 10 déc. 2022 à 11:34, Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> a écrit :
> >
> > > Even if it is maintenance, now it's not time for just good intentions
> > > (which are very much appreciated), but time for action, and action is
> not
> > > there and my confidence in it happening any time soon is very low.
> > >
> > > Let me give you a concrete example:
> > >
> > > * In 2019, we voted on moving jcloud-karaf under the Apache Karaf
> project
> > > [1] because we were not able to maintain the project properly.
> > > * The last commit in the transferred project [2] is from 2019 (3 years
> > > back).
> > > * That project is still in jclouds 2.2.0, whilst jclouds is in 2.6.0;
> > it's
> > > still 4 releases behind.
> > >
> > > There have been no feature additions, but over 3 years there haven't
> > > even been maintenance tasks done at all, even just to keep the project
> up
> > > to date with upstream jclouds.
> > >
> > > Although I appreciate all the good intentions of people volunteering, I
> > > don't see any action here (as Gaul also requested), and honestly, I
> think
> > > repeating the jcloud-karaf story will not do any favor to users. If we
> > > change the PMC and inactivity continues, jclouds will be even in a
> worse
> > > position than it is today: it will keep having an inactive PMC, but
> > > composed of people that are even less familiar/expert in its codebase.
> > >
> > > IMO, if we really care about users, we should see something here beyond
> > the
> > > much-appreciated good intentions, because we've tried this route in the
> > > past and it has not worked.
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/30770j9jwcn14vzczzkbhz37g8q2olc6
> > > [2] https://github.com/apache/karaf-jclouds
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:58 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about "maintenance",
> I
> > > > don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
> > > > As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
> > > > important dependency in their project.
> > > >
> > > > I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng guys
> > > > (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.
> > > >
> > > > Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do in
> > > > Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <
> > ignasi.barrera@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping
> > up
> > > > > and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
> > > > >
> > > > > You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project
> is
> > > > still
> > > > > alive or not."
> > > > > It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of
> > > inaction
> > > > > should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> jb@nanthrax.net
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand
> this),
> > > > > > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see
> > any
> > > > > > issue there.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if
> we
> > > > > > retire the project.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> > > > > > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take
> > over, I
> > > > > > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have
> new
> > > > > > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> > > > > > "welcoming".
> > > > > > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
> > > > alive or
> > > > > > not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and
> > then
> > > > > > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project
> and
> > > to
> > > > > > date,
> > > > > > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > > > > > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is
> all
> > > the
> > > > > > energy
> > > > > > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for
> > > > success
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the
> > > > project.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for
> your
> > > > > > bandwidth!
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>]

Il Sab 10 Dic 2022, 12:47 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> ha scritto:

> Ok. Fair enough.
>
> Imho Karaf-jclouds is probably different as the number of users is very
> very thin.
>
> But I understand your points.
>
> I will support of moving to attic anyway. Just wanted to give a chance for
> the community to speak up.
>
> The users will find alternatives (maybe forking part of jclouds).
>

I think that forking jclouds is not a good solution, as you lose all the
potential interactions with other users, for instance in case of security
issues (cannot inform all the users, share patches in a coodinated way).

I understand the points of the people in this thread that are skeptical
about adding external people. Probably I would feel the same way.

I believe that it is up to the jcloud PMC to decide on the destiny of the
project and as JB is saying, users will find their solutions.

My 2 cents

Enrico



> Thanks
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le sam. 10 déc. 2022 à 11:34, Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> a écrit :
>
> > Even if it is maintenance, now it's not time for just good intentions
> > (which are very much appreciated), but time for action, and action is not
> > there and my confidence in it happening any time soon is very low.
> >
> > Let me give you a concrete example:
> >
> > * In 2019, we voted on moving jcloud-karaf under the Apache Karaf project
> > [1] because we were not able to maintain the project properly.
> > * The last commit in the transferred project [2] is from 2019 (3 years
> > back).
> > * That project is still in jclouds 2.2.0, whilst jclouds is in 2.6.0;
> it's
> > still 4 releases behind.
> >
> > There have been no feature additions, but over 3 years there haven't
> > even been maintenance tasks done at all, even just to keep the project up
> > to date with upstream jclouds.
> >
> > Although I appreciate all the good intentions of people volunteering, I
> > don't see any action here (as Gaul also requested), and honestly, I think
> > repeating the jcloud-karaf story will not do any favor to users. If we
> > change the PMC and inactivity continues, jclouds will be even in a worse
> > position than it is today: it will keep having an inactive PMC, but
> > composed of people that are even less familiar/expert in its codebase.
> >
> > IMO, if we really care about users, we should see something here beyond
> the
> > much-appreciated good intentions, because we've tried this route in the
> > past and it has not worked.
> >
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/30770j9jwcn14vzczzkbhz37g8q2olc6
> > [2] https://github.com/apache/karaf-jclouds
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:58 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about "maintenance", I
> > > don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
> > > As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
> > > important dependency in their project.
> > >
> > > I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng guys
> > > (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.
> > >
> > > Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do in
> > > Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <
> ignasi.barrera@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping
> up
> > > > and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
> > > >
> > > > You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project is
> > > still
> > > > alive or not."
> > > > It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of
> > inaction
> > > > should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
> > > > > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see
> any
> > > > > issue there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
> > > > > retire the project.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> > > > > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take
> over, I
> > > > > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
> > > > > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> > > > > "welcoming".
> > > > > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
> > > alive or
> > > > > not.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and
> then
> > > > > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and
> > to
> > > > > date,
> > > > > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > > > > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all
> > the
> > > > > energy
> > > > > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for
> > > success
> > > > > and
> > > > > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the
> > > project.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your
> > > > > bandwidth!
> > > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>]

Il Sab 10 Dic 2022, 12:47 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> ha scritto:

> Ok. Fair enough.
>
> Imho Karaf-jclouds is probably different as the number of users is very
> very thin.
>
> But I understand your points.
>
> I will support of moving to attic anyway. Just wanted to give a chance for
> the community to speak up.
>
> The users will find alternatives (maybe forking part of jclouds).
>

I think that forking jclouds is not a good solution, as you lose all the
potential interactions with other users, for instance in case of security
issues (cannot inform all the users, share patches in a coodinated way).

I understand the points of the people in this thread that are skeptical
about adding external people. Probably I would feel the same way.

I believe that it is up to the jcloud PMC to decide on the destiny of the
project and as JB is saying, users will find their solutions.

My 2 cents

Enrico



> Thanks
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le sam. 10 déc. 2022 à 11:34, Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> a écrit :
>
> > Even if it is maintenance, now it's not time for just good intentions
> > (which are very much appreciated), but time for action, and action is not
> > there and my confidence in it happening any time soon is very low.
> >
> > Let me give you a concrete example:
> >
> > * In 2019, we voted on moving jcloud-karaf under the Apache Karaf project
> > [1] because we were not able to maintain the project properly.
> > * The last commit in the transferred project [2] is from 2019 (3 years
> > back).
> > * That project is still in jclouds 2.2.0, whilst jclouds is in 2.6.0;
> it's
> > still 4 releases behind.
> >
> > There have been no feature additions, but over 3 years there haven't
> > even been maintenance tasks done at all, even just to keep the project up
> > to date with upstream jclouds.
> >
> > Although I appreciate all the good intentions of people volunteering, I
> > don't see any action here (as Gaul also requested), and honestly, I think
> > repeating the jcloud-karaf story will not do any favor to users. If we
> > change the PMC and inactivity continues, jclouds will be even in a worse
> > position than it is today: it will keep having an inactive PMC, but
> > composed of people that are even less familiar/expert in its codebase.
> >
> > IMO, if we really care about users, we should see something here beyond
> the
> > much-appreciated good intentions, because we've tried this route in the
> > past and it has not worked.
> >
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/30770j9jwcn14vzczzkbhz37g8q2olc6
> > [2] https://github.com/apache/karaf-jclouds
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:58 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about "maintenance", I
> > > don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
> > > As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
> > > important dependency in their project.
> > >
> > > I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng guys
> > > (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.
> > >
> > > Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do in
> > > Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <
> ignasi.barrera@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping
> up
> > > > and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
> > > >
> > > > You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project is
> > > still
> > > > alive or not."
> > > > It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of
> > inaction
> > > > should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
> > > > > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see
> any
> > > > > issue there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
> > > > > retire the project.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> > > > > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take
> over, I
> > > > > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
> > > > > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> > > > > "welcoming".
> > > > > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
> > > alive or
> > > > > not.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and
> then
> > > > > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and
> > to
> > > > > date,
> > > > > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > > > > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all
> > the
> > > > > energy
> > > > > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for
> > > success
> > > > > and
> > > > > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the
> > > project.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your
> > > > > bandwidth!
> > > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Ok. Fair enough.

Imho Karaf-jclouds is probably different as the number of users is very
very thin.

But I understand your points.

I will support of moving to attic anyway. Just wanted to give a chance for
the community to speak up.

The users will find alternatives (maybe forking part of jclouds).

Thanks
Regards
JB

Le sam. 10 déc. 2022 à 11:34, Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> a écrit :

> Even if it is maintenance, now it's not time for just good intentions
> (which are very much appreciated), but time for action, and action is not
> there and my confidence in it happening any time soon is very low.
>
> Let me give you a concrete example:
>
> * In 2019, we voted on moving jcloud-karaf under the Apache Karaf project
> [1] because we were not able to maintain the project properly.
> * The last commit in the transferred project [2] is from 2019 (3 years
> back).
> * That project is still in jclouds 2.2.0, whilst jclouds is in 2.6.0; it's
> still 4 releases behind.
>
> There have been no feature additions, but over 3 years there haven't
> even been maintenance tasks done at all, even just to keep the project up
> to date with upstream jclouds.
>
> Although I appreciate all the good intentions of people volunteering, I
> don't see any action here (as Gaul also requested), and honestly, I think
> repeating the jcloud-karaf story will not do any favor to users. If we
> change the PMC and inactivity continues, jclouds will be even in a worse
> position than it is today: it will keep having an inactive PMC, but
> composed of people that are even less familiar/expert in its codebase.
>
> IMO, if we really care about users, we should see something here beyond the
> much-appreciated good intentions, because we've tried this route in the
> past and it has not worked.
>
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/30770j9jwcn14vzczzkbhz37g8q2olc6
> [2] https://github.com/apache/karaf-jclouds
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:58 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
> > That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about "maintenance", I
> > don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
> > As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
> > important dependency in their project.
> >
> > I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng guys
> > (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.
> >
> > Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do in
> > Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <ig...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping up
> > > and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
> > >
> > > You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project is
> > still
> > > alive or not."
> > > It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of
> inaction
> > > should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
> > > > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
> > > > issue there.
> > > >
> > > > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
> > > > retire the project.
> > > >
> > > > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> > > > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
> > > > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
> > > > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> > > > "welcoming".
> > > > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
> > alive or
> > > > not.
> > > >
> > > > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
> > > > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> > > > >
> > > > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and
> to
> > > > date,
> > > > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > > > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all
> the
> > > > energy
> > > > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for
> > success
> > > > and
> > > > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the
> > project.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your
> > > > bandwidth!
> > > >
> >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Ok. Fair enough.

Imho Karaf-jclouds is probably different as the number of users is very
very thin.

But I understand your points.

I will support of moving to attic anyway. Just wanted to give a chance for
the community to speak up.

The users will find alternatives (maybe forking part of jclouds).

Thanks
Regards
JB

Le sam. 10 déc. 2022 à 11:34, Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> a écrit :

> Even if it is maintenance, now it's not time for just good intentions
> (which are very much appreciated), but time for action, and action is not
> there and my confidence in it happening any time soon is very low.
>
> Let me give you a concrete example:
>
> * In 2019, we voted on moving jcloud-karaf under the Apache Karaf project
> [1] because we were not able to maintain the project properly.
> * The last commit in the transferred project [2] is from 2019 (3 years
> back).
> * That project is still in jclouds 2.2.0, whilst jclouds is in 2.6.0; it's
> still 4 releases behind.
>
> There have been no feature additions, but over 3 years there haven't
> even been maintenance tasks done at all, even just to keep the project up
> to date with upstream jclouds.
>
> Although I appreciate all the good intentions of people volunteering, I
> don't see any action here (as Gaul also requested), and honestly, I think
> repeating the jcloud-karaf story will not do any favor to users. If we
> change the PMC and inactivity continues, jclouds will be even in a worse
> position than it is today: it will keep having an inactive PMC, but
> composed of people that are even less familiar/expert in its codebase.
>
> IMO, if we really care about users, we should see something here beyond the
> much-appreciated good intentions, because we've tried this route in the
> past and it has not worked.
>
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/30770j9jwcn14vzczzkbhz37g8q2olc6
> [2] https://github.com/apache/karaf-jclouds
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:58 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
> > That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about "maintenance", I
> > don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
> > As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
> > important dependency in their project.
> >
> > I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng guys
> > (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.
> >
> > Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do in
> > Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <ig...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping up
> > > and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
> > >
> > > You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project is
> > still
> > > alive or not."
> > > It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of
> inaction
> > > should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
> > > > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
> > > > issue there.
> > > >
> > > > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
> > > > retire the project.
> > > >
> > > > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> > > > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
> > > > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
> > > > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> > > > "welcoming".
> > > > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
> > alive or
> > > > not.
> > > >
> > > > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
> > > > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> > > > >
> > > > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and
> to
> > > > date,
> > > > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > > > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all
> the
> > > > energy
> > > > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for
> > success
> > > > and
> > > > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the
> > project.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your
> > > > bandwidth!
> > > >
> >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

Even if it is maintenance, now it's not time for just good intentions
(which are very much appreciated), but time for action, and action is not
there and my confidence in it happening any time soon is very low.

Let me give you a concrete example:

* In 2019, we voted on moving jcloud-karaf under the Apache Karaf project
[1] because we were not able to maintain the project properly.
* The last commit in the transferred project [2] is from 2019 (3 years
back).
* That project is still in jclouds 2.2.0, whilst jclouds is in 2.6.0; it's
still 4 releases behind.

There have been no feature additions, but over 3 years there haven't
even been maintenance tasks done at all, even just to keep the project up
to date with upstream jclouds.

Although I appreciate all the good intentions of people volunteering, I
don't see any action here (as Gaul also requested), and honestly, I think
repeating the jcloud-karaf story will not do any favor to users. If we
change the PMC and inactivity continues, jclouds will be even in a worse
position than it is today: it will keep having an inactive PMC, but
composed of people that are even less familiar/expert in its codebase.

IMO, if we really care about users, we should see something here beyond the
much-appreciated good intentions, because we've tried this route in the
past and it has not worked.


[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/30770j9jwcn14vzczzkbhz37g8q2olc6
[2] https://github.com/apache/karaf-jclouds



On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:58 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:

> That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about "maintenance", I
> don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
> As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
> important dependency in their project.
>
> I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng guys
> (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.
>
> Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do in
> Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <ig...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping up
> > and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
> >
> > You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project is
> still
> > alive or not."
> > It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of inaction
> > should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
> > > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
> > > issue there.
> > >
> > > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
> > > retire the project.
> > >
> > > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> > > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
> > > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
> > > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> > > "welcoming".
> > > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
> alive or
> > > not.
> > >
> > > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
> > > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> > > >
> > > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to
> > > date,
> > > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the
> > > energy
> > > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for
> success
> > > and
> > > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the
> project.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your
> > > bandwidth!
> > >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

Even if it is maintenance, now it's not time for just good intentions
(which are very much appreciated), but time for action, and action is not
there and my confidence in it happening any time soon is very low.

Let me give you a concrete example:

* In 2019, we voted on moving jcloud-karaf under the Apache Karaf project
[1] because we were not able to maintain the project properly.
* The last commit in the transferred project [2] is from 2019 (3 years
back).
* That project is still in jclouds 2.2.0, whilst jclouds is in 2.6.0; it's
still 4 releases behind.

There have been no feature additions, but over 3 years there haven't
even been maintenance tasks done at all, even just to keep the project up
to date with upstream jclouds.

Although I appreciate all the good intentions of people volunteering, I
don't see any action here (as Gaul also requested), and honestly, I think
repeating the jcloud-karaf story will not do any favor to users. If we
change the PMC and inactivity continues, jclouds will be even in a worse
position than it is today: it will keep having an inactive PMC, but
composed of people that are even less familiar/expert in its codebase.

IMO, if we really care about users, we should see something here beyond the
much-appreciated good intentions, because we've tried this route in the
past and it has not worked.


[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/30770j9jwcn14vzczzkbhz37g8q2olc6
[2] https://github.com/apache/karaf-jclouds



On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:58 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:

> That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about "maintenance", I
> don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
> As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
> important dependency in their project.
>
> I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng guys
> (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.
>
> Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do in
> Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <ig...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping up
> > and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
> >
> > You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project is
> still
> > alive or not."
> > It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of inaction
> > should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
> > > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
> > > issue there.
> > >
> > > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
> > > retire the project.
> > >
> > > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> > > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
> > > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
> > > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> > > "welcoming".
> > > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
> alive or
> > > not.
> > >
> > > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
> > > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> > > >
> > > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to
> > > date,
> > > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the
> > > energy
> > > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for
> success
> > > and
> > > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the
> project.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your
> > > bandwidth!
> > >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about "maintenance", I
don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
important dependency in their project.

I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng guys
(at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.

Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do in
Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).

Regards
JB

On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping up
> and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
>
> You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
> alive or not."
> It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of inaction
> should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
> > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
> > issue there.
> >
> > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
> > retire the project.
> >
> > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
> > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
> > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> > "welcoming".
> > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or
> > not.
> >
> > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
> > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> > >
> > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > > >
> > >
> > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to
> > date,
> > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the
> > energy
> > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success
> > and
> > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your
> > bandwidth!
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about "maintenance", I
don't wait for any new big features in the short term.
As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an
important dependency in their project.

I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng guys
(at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.

Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do in
Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).

Regards
JB

On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping up
> and starting to take action, and that is not happening.
>
> You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
> alive or not."
> It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of inaction
> should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
> > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
> > issue there.
> >
> > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
> > retire the project.
> >
> > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
> > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
> > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> > "welcoming".
> > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or
> > not.
> >
> > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
> > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> > >
> > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > > >
> > >
> > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to
> > date,
> > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the
> > energy
> > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success
> > and
> > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your
> > bandwidth!
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <ig...@gmail.com>]

It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping up
and starting to take action, and that is not happening.

You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
alive or not."
It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of inaction
should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?

On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:

> If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
> fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
> issue there.
>
> Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
> retire the project.
>
> As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
> think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
> people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> "welcoming".
> After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or
> not.
>
> If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
> pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> >
> > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > >
> >
> > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to
> date,
> > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the
> energy
> > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success
> and
> > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
> >
> >
> >
> > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your
> bandwidth!
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <ig...@gmail.com>]

It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually stepping up
and starting to take action, and that is not happening.

You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still
alive or not."
It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of inaction
should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number?

On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:

> If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
> fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
> issue there.
>
> Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
> retire the project.
>
> As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
> continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
> think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
> people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
> "welcoming".
> After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or
> not.
>
> If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
> pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> >
> > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > >
> >
> > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to
> date,
> > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the
> energy
> > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success
> and
> > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
> >
> >
> >
> > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your
> bandwidth!
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
issue there.

Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
retire the project.

As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
"welcoming".
After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or not.

If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.

Regards
JB


On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I agree with Gaul's comments.
>
> If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> >
>
> It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
> nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
> that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
> agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
>
>
>
> P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand this),
fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't see any
issue there.

Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen if we
retire the project.

As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to
continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take over, I
think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have new
people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be
"welcoming".
After some months, we will definitely see if the project is still alive or not.

If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and then
pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.

Regards
JB


On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I agree with Gaul's comments.
>
> If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> >
>
> It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
> nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
> If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
> that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
> agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.
>
>
>
> P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

I agree with Gaul's comments.

If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
>

It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.



P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

I agree with Gaul's comments.

If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
>

It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for success and
agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring the project.



P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for your bandwidth!

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

My understanding is that other communities (at least pulsar and Brooklyn)
are using still jclouds.

So they are volunteer to maintain jclouds more for the need of their
project.

If it doesn’t work, then these projects will find an alternative to jclouds
or fork jclouds.

If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)

Regards
JB

Le ven. 9 déc. 2022 à 14:38, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> a écrit :

> I want to understand what the potential new committers plan to _do_.
> Currently I am the only active PMC writing code, reviewing PRs, and
> cutting releases.  I do not see anyone volunteering to run the 2.6.0
> release so I do not understand how the volunteers plan to continue the
> larger goal of continuing the project.  Dissolving the project seems
> more kind to users than entering a zombie state like OpenOffice.
>
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 01:12:47PM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I was about to reply.
> >
> > As it seems we have interest and volunteers, if the current PMC members
> > agree, we could extend the PMC to have new active people.
> >
> > As said I’m volunteer with Enrico to maintain jclouds as it used in other
> > Apache projects.
> >
> > What the other PMC members are thinking ?
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > Le dim. 4 déc. 2022 à 16:32, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
> >
> > > Any updates here?
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > > Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha
> scritto:
> > >
> > > > I concur with Enrico,
> > > > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be
> secure.
> > > > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding
> to
> > > > issues and requests.
> > > >
> > > > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next
> step, but
> > > > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> > > >
> > > > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough
> for
> > > > keeping live the project.
> > > >
> > > > Juan
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <
> gaul@apache.org>
> > > > > ha scritto:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members
> plan
> > > to
> > > > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.
> For
> > > > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no
> previous
> > > help
> > > > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project,
> e.g.,
> > > > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing
> list
> > > > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> > > anyone
> > > > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy
> which
> > > > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would
> like to
> > > > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork
> but
> > > > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community
> support.
> > > > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > > > >
> > > > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > > > - security fixes
> > > > > - responding to user requests
> > > > >
> > > > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > > > need many new features
> > > > > and they are pretty stable,
> > > > >
> > > > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of
> the
> > > > > supported providers,
> > > > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > > > >
> > > > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little
> bit by
> > > > > engaging more with the well known
> > > > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they
> use
> > > > > JClouds
> > > > >
> > > > > my 2 cents
> > > > > Enrico
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention
> Karaf
> > > > > Minho here)
> > > > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on
> vote
> > > and
> > > > > > > inform the board
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <
> juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help
> JClouds
> > > and
> > > > > joining
> > > > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > Juan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> > > geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that
> would
> > > be
> > > > > helpful.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org>
> a
> > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose
> our
> > > help
> > > > > to join
> > > > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project
> alive
> > > if
> > > > > anybody
> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I
> confess I
> > > > had
> > > > > missed
> > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of
> it
> > > > > today.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I
> must
> > > > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the
> implications
> > > for
> > > > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> > > about
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community,
> but
> > > > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC
> guidelines
> > > > on
> > > > > moving
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move
> to the
> > > > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of
> active
> > > > PMC
> > > > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > > > community
> > > > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable.
> If
> > > the
> > > > > worst
> > > > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> > > within
> > > > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members
> would be
> > > > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > > > options
> > > > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such
> as
> > > some
> > > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> > > gaul@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits
> from 26
> > > > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This
> is
> > > > > despite
> > > > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to
> 80,000
> > > > for
> > > > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active
> committers
> > > has
> > > > > shrunk
> > > > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This
> means
> > > > that
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > > > project,
> > > > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding
> to
> > > > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers
> themselves.
> > > > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to
> help
> > > > > out?
> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before
> retiring
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to
> the
> > > > Cloud
> > > > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > >
> > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > >
> > >
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

My understanding is that other communities (at least pulsar and Brooklyn)
are using still jclouds.

So they are volunteer to maintain jclouds more for the need of their
project.

If it doesn’t work, then these projects will find an alternative to jclouds
or fork jclouds.

If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)

Regards
JB

Le ven. 9 déc. 2022 à 14:38, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> a écrit :

> I want to understand what the potential new committers plan to _do_.
> Currently I am the only active PMC writing code, reviewing PRs, and
> cutting releases.  I do not see anyone volunteering to run the 2.6.0
> release so I do not understand how the volunteers plan to continue the
> larger goal of continuing the project.  Dissolving the project seems
> more kind to users than entering a zombie state like OpenOffice.
>
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 01:12:47PM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I was about to reply.
> >
> > As it seems we have interest and volunteers, if the current PMC members
> > agree, we could extend the PMC to have new active people.
> >
> > As said I’m volunteer with Enrico to maintain jclouds as it used in other
> > Apache projects.
> >
> > What the other PMC members are thinking ?
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > Le dim. 4 déc. 2022 à 16:32, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
> >
> > > Any updates here?
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > > Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha
> scritto:
> > >
> > > > I concur with Enrico,
> > > > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be
> secure.
> > > > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding
> to
> > > > issues and requests.
> > > >
> > > > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next
> step, but
> > > > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> > > >
> > > > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough
> for
> > > > keeping live the project.
> > > >
> > > > Juan
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <
> gaul@apache.org>
> > > > > ha scritto:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members
> plan
> > > to
> > > > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.
> For
> > > > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no
> previous
> > > help
> > > > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project,
> e.g.,
> > > > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing
> list
> > > > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> > > anyone
> > > > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy
> which
> > > > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would
> like to
> > > > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork
> but
> > > > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community
> support.
> > > > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > > > >
> > > > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > > > - security fixes
> > > > > - responding to user requests
> > > > >
> > > > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > > > need many new features
> > > > > and they are pretty stable,
> > > > >
> > > > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of
> the
> > > > > supported providers,
> > > > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > > > >
> > > > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little
> bit by
> > > > > engaging more with the well known
> > > > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they
> use
> > > > > JClouds
> > > > >
> > > > > my 2 cents
> > > > > Enrico
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention
> Karaf
> > > > > Minho here)
> > > > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on
> vote
> > > and
> > > > > > > inform the board
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <
> juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help
> JClouds
> > > and
> > > > > joining
> > > > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > Juan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> > > geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that
> would
> > > be
> > > > > helpful.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org>
> a
> > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose
> our
> > > help
> > > > > to join
> > > > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project
> alive
> > > if
> > > > > anybody
> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I
> confess I
> > > > had
> > > > > missed
> > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of
> it
> > > > > today.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I
> must
> > > > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the
> implications
> > > for
> > > > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> > > about
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community,
> but
> > > > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC
> guidelines
> > > > on
> > > > > moving
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move
> to the
> > > > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of
> active
> > > > PMC
> > > > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > > > community
> > > > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable.
> If
> > > the
> > > > > worst
> > > > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> > > within
> > > > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members
> would be
> > > > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > > > options
> > > > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such
> as
> > > some
> > > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> > > gaul@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits
> from 26
> > > > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This
> is
> > > > > despite
> > > > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to
> 80,000
> > > > for
> > > > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active
> committers
> > > has
> > > > > shrunk
> > > > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This
> means
> > > > that
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > > > project,
> > > > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding
> to
> > > > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers
> themselves.
> > > > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to
> help
> > > > > out?
> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before
> retiring
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to
> the
> > > > Cloud
> > > > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > >
> > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > >
> > >
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

I want to understand what the potential new committers plan to _do_.
Currently I am the only active PMC writing code, reviewing PRs, and
cutting releases.  I do not see anyone volunteering to run the 2.6.0
release so I do not understand how the volunteers plan to continue the
larger goal of continuing the project.  Dissolving the project seems
more kind to users than entering a zombie state like OpenOffice.

On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 01:12:47PM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I was about to reply.
> 
> As it seems we have interest and volunteers, if the current PMC members
> agree, we could extend the PMC to have new active people.
> 
> As said I’m volunteer with Enrico to maintain jclouds as it used in other
> Apache projects.
> 
> What the other PMC members are thinking ?
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> Le dim. 4 déc. 2022 à 16:32, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> 
> > Any updates here?
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha scritto:
> >
> > > I concur with Enrico,
> > > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> > > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> > > issues and requests.
> > >
> > > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> > > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> > >
> > > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> > > keeping live the project.
> > >
> > > Juan
> > >
> > > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > > > ha scritto:
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan
> > to
> > > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
> > help
> > > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> > anyone
> > > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > >
> > > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > > >
> > > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > > - security fixes
> > > > - responding to user requests
> > > >
> > > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > > need many new features
> > > > and they are pretty stable,
> > > >
> > > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > > > supported providers,
> > > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > > >
> > > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > > > engaging more with the well known
> > > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > > > JClouds
> > > >
> > > > my 2 cents
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > > > Minho here)
> > > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
> > and
> > > > > > inform the board
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <juan@cloudsoft.io
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
> > and
> > > > joining
> > > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Juan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> > geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
> > be
> > > > helpful.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
> > help
> > > > to join
> > > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive
> > if
> > > > anybody
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> > > had
> > > > missed
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > > > today.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
> > for
> > > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> > about
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> > > on
> > > > moving
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> > > PMC
> > > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > > community
> > > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
> > the
> > > > worst
> > > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> > within
> > > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > > options
> > > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
> > some
> > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> > gaul@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > > > despite
> > > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> > > for
> > > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
> > has
> > > > shrunk
> > > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> > > that
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > > project,
> > > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > > > out?
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> > > the
> > > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> > > Cloud
> > > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > Senior Software Engineer
> > >
> > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > >
> >

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

I want to understand what the potential new committers plan to _do_.
Currently I am the only active PMC writing code, reviewing PRs, and
cutting releases.  I do not see anyone volunteering to run the 2.6.0
release so I do not understand how the volunteers plan to continue the
larger goal of continuing the project.  Dissolving the project seems
more kind to users than entering a zombie state like OpenOffice.

On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 01:12:47PM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I was about to reply.
> 
> As it seems we have interest and volunteers, if the current PMC members
> agree, we could extend the PMC to have new active people.
> 
> As said I’m volunteer with Enrico to maintain jclouds as it used in other
> Apache projects.
> 
> What the other PMC members are thinking ?
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> Le dim. 4 déc. 2022 à 16:32, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> 
> > Any updates here?
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha scritto:
> >
> > > I concur with Enrico,
> > > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> > > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> > > issues and requests.
> > >
> > > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> > > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> > >
> > > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> > > keeping live the project.
> > >
> > > Juan
> > >
> > > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > > > ha scritto:
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan
> > to
> > > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
> > help
> > > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> > anyone
> > > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > >
> > > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > > >
> > > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > > - security fixes
> > > > - responding to user requests
> > > >
> > > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > > need many new features
> > > > and they are pretty stable,
> > > >
> > > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > > > supported providers,
> > > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > > >
> > > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > > > engaging more with the well known
> > > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > > > JClouds
> > > >
> > > > my 2 cents
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > > > Minho here)
> > > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
> > and
> > > > > > inform the board
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <juan@cloudsoft.io
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
> > and
> > > > joining
> > > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Juan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> > geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
> > be
> > > > helpful.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
> > help
> > > > to join
> > > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive
> > if
> > > > anybody
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> > > had
> > > > missed
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > > > today.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
> > for
> > > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> > about
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> > > on
> > > > moving
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> > > PMC
> > > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > > community
> > > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
> > the
> > > > worst
> > > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> > within
> > > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > > options
> > > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
> > some
> > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> > gaul@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > > > despite
> > > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> > > for
> > > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
> > has
> > > > shrunk
> > > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> > > that
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > > project,
> > > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > > > out?
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> > > the
> > > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> > > Cloud
> > > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > Senior Software Engineer
> > >
> > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > >
> >

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Francois Papon <fr...@openobject.fr>]

Sounds good to me!

regards,

Francois

On 06/12/2022 13:18, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Oh and also Francois said he’s volunteer.
>
> So I would propose to reshape the PMC to include volunteer guys.
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le mar. 6 déc. 2022 à 13:12, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> a
> écrit :
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I was about to reply.
>>
>> As it seems we have interest and volunteers, if the current PMC members
>> agree, we could extend the PMC to have new active people.
>>
>> As said I’m volunteer with Enrico to maintain jclouds as it used in other
>> Apache projects.
>>
>> What the other PMC members are thinking ?
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> Le dim. 4 déc. 2022 à 16:32, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Any updates here?
>>>
>>> Enrico
>>>
>>> Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha scritto:
>>>
>>>> I concur with Enrico,
>>>> First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
>>>> Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
>>>> issues and requests.
>>>>
>>>> Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step,
>>> but
>>>> it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
>>>>
>>>> That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
>>>> keeping live the project.
>>>>
>>>> Juan
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org
>>>>> ha scritto:
>>>>>> I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members
>>> plan to
>>>>>> do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
>>>>>> example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
>>> help
>>>>>> testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
>>>>>>> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
>>>>>>> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
>>> anyone
>>>>>>> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>>>>>> jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
>>>>>> accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like
>>> to
>>>>>> see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
>>>>>> currently I do most of the maintenance with little community
>>> support.
>>>>>> How will this change under a new PMC set?
>>>>> (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
>>>>> In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
>>>>> - security fixes
>>>>> - responding to user requests
>>>>>
>>>>> There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
>>>>> need many new features
>>>>> and they are pretty stable,
>>>>>
>>>>> In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
>>>>> supported providers,
>>>>> but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
>>>>> engaging more with the well known
>>>>> projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
>>>>> JClouds
>>>>>
>>>>> my 2 cents
>>>>> Enrico
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks for your update !
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
>>>>>>> 1. PMC set proposal
>>>>>>> 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
>>>>> Minho here)
>>>>>>> 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
>>> and
>>>>>>> inform the board
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <
>>> juan@cloudsoft.io>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
>>> and
>>>>> joining
>>>>>>>> the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Juan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
>>> geomacy@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
>>> be
>>>>> helpful.
>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>> Geoff
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>>>>> jb@nanthrax.net>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I’m in ;)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
>>> help
>>>>> to join
>>>>>>>>>>> the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project
>>> alive if
>>>>> anybody
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>> ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Francois
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
>>>> had
>>>>> missed
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>> when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
>>>>> today.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
>>>>> confess I am
>>>>>>>>>>>> sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
>>>>> critical
>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
>>> for
>>>>> Brooklyn
>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
>>> about
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> implications of the lower activity in the community, but
>>>>> that is
>>>>>>>>>>>> another issue.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC
>>> guidelines
>>>> on
>>>>> moving
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> the Attic [1]. These note that
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to
>>> the
>>>>> Attic is
>>>>>>>>>>>> lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of
>>> active
>>>> PMC
>>>>>>>>> members"
>>>>>>>>>>>> (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
>>>>> community
>>>>>>>>> members
>>>>>>>>>>>> to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
>>> the
>>>>> worst
>>>>>>>>> comes
>>>>>>>>>>>> to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
>>>>> re-establishing it with
>>>>>>>>>>>> a new or modified PMC".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
>>> within
>>>>> Jclouds
>>>>>>>>>>>> PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
>>>>> willing to
>>>>>>>>>>>> continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
>>>> options
>>>>> could be
>>>>>>>>>>>> explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
>>> some
>>>>> community
>>>>>>>>>>>> members joining the PMC.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>>>>>>>>> Geoff
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
>>> gaul@apache.org
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
>>>>>>>>> contributors in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
>>>>> despite
>>>>>>>>> growing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> jclouds-core
>>>>>>>>>>>>> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
>>> has
>>>>> shrunk
>>>>>>>>> and we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
>>>> that
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>>>>>>>> must move to the Apache attic.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
>>>> project,
>>>>> e.g.,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
>>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
>>>>> Does anyone
>>>>>>>>>>>>> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to
>>> help
>>>>> out?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before
>>> retiring
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Gaul
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://gaul.org/
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> François
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Juan Cabrerizo
>>>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
>>>> Cloud
>>>>>>>> juan@cloudsoft.io
>>>>>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Andrew Gaul
>>>>>> http://gaul.org/
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Juan Cabrerizo
>>>> Senior Software Engineer
>>>>
>>>> *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
>>>> juan@cloudsoft.io
>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>>>> https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>>>> <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>>>>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Francois Papon <fr...@openobject.fr>]

Sounds good to me!

regards,

Francois

On 06/12/2022 13:18, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Oh and also Francois said he’s volunteer.
>
> So I would propose to reshape the PMC to include volunteer guys.
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le mar. 6 déc. 2022 à 13:12, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> a
> écrit :
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I was about to reply.
>>
>> As it seems we have interest and volunteers, if the current PMC members
>> agree, we could extend the PMC to have new active people.
>>
>> As said I’m volunteer with Enrico to maintain jclouds as it used in other
>> Apache projects.
>>
>> What the other PMC members are thinking ?
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> Le dim. 4 déc. 2022 à 16:32, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Any updates here?
>>>
>>> Enrico
>>>
>>> Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha scritto:
>>>
>>>> I concur with Enrico,
>>>> First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
>>>> Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
>>>> issues and requests.
>>>>
>>>> Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step,
>>> but
>>>> it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
>>>>
>>>> That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
>>>> keeping live the project.
>>>>
>>>> Juan
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org
>>>>> ha scritto:
>>>>>> I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members
>>> plan to
>>>>>> do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
>>>>>> example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
>>> help
>>>>>> testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
>>>>>>> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
>>>>>>> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
>>> anyone
>>>>>>> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>>>>>> jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
>>>>>> accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like
>>> to
>>>>>> see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
>>>>>> currently I do most of the maintenance with little community
>>> support.
>>>>>> How will this change under a new PMC set?
>>>>> (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
>>>>> In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
>>>>> - security fixes
>>>>> - responding to user requests
>>>>>
>>>>> There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
>>>>> need many new features
>>>>> and they are pretty stable,
>>>>>
>>>>> In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
>>>>> supported providers,
>>>>> but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
>>>>> engaging more with the well known
>>>>> projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
>>>>> JClouds
>>>>>
>>>>> my 2 cents
>>>>> Enrico
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks for your update !
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
>>>>>>> 1. PMC set proposal
>>>>>>> 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
>>>>> Minho here)
>>>>>>> 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
>>> and
>>>>>>> inform the board
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <
>>> juan@cloudsoft.io>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
>>> and
>>>>> joining
>>>>>>>> the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Juan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
>>> geomacy@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
>>> be
>>>>> helpful.
>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>> Geoff
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>>>>> jb@nanthrax.net>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I’m in ;)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
>>> help
>>>>> to join
>>>>>>>>>>> the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project
>>> alive if
>>>>> anybody
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>> ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Francois
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
>>>> had
>>>>> missed
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>> when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
>>>>> today.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
>>>>> confess I am
>>>>>>>>>>>> sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
>>>>> critical
>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
>>> for
>>>>> Brooklyn
>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
>>> about
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> implications of the lower activity in the community, but
>>>>> that is
>>>>>>>>>>>> another issue.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC
>>> guidelines
>>>> on
>>>>> moving
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> the Attic [1]. These note that
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to
>>> the
>>>>> Attic is
>>>>>>>>>>>> lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of
>>> active
>>>> PMC
>>>>>>>>> members"
>>>>>>>>>>>> (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
>>>>> community
>>>>>>>>> members
>>>>>>>>>>>> to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
>>> the
>>>>> worst
>>>>>>>>> comes
>>>>>>>>>>>> to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
>>>>> re-establishing it with
>>>>>>>>>>>> a new or modified PMC".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
>>> within
>>>>> Jclouds
>>>>>>>>>>>> PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
>>>>> willing to
>>>>>>>>>>>> continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
>>>> options
>>>>> could be
>>>>>>>>>>>> explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
>>> some
>>>>> community
>>>>>>>>>>>> members joining the PMC.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>>>>>>>>> Geoff
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
>>> gaul@apache.org
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
>>>>>>>>> contributors in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
>>>>> despite
>>>>>>>>> growing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> jclouds-core
>>>>>>>>>>>>> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
>>> has
>>>>> shrunk
>>>>>>>>> and we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
>>>> that
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>>>>>>>> must move to the Apache attic.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
>>>> project,
>>>>> e.g.,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
>>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
>>>>> Does anyone
>>>>>>>>>>>>> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to
>>> help
>>>>> out?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before
>>> retiring
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Gaul
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://gaul.org/
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> François
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Juan Cabrerizo
>>>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
>>>> Cloud
>>>>>>>> juan@cloudsoft.io
>>>>>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Andrew Gaul
>>>>>> http://gaul.org/
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Juan Cabrerizo
>>>> Senior Software Engineer
>>>>
>>>> *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
>>>> juan@cloudsoft.io
>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>>>> https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>>>> <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>>>>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Oh and also Francois said he’s volunteer.

So I would propose to reshape the PMC to include volunteer guys.

Thoughts ?

Regards
JB

Le mar. 6 déc. 2022 à 13:12, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> a
écrit :

> Hi
>
> I was about to reply.
>
> As it seems we have interest and volunteers, if the current PMC members
> agree, we could extend the PMC to have new active people.
>
> As said I’m volunteer with Enrico to maintain jclouds as it used in other
> Apache projects.
>
> What the other PMC members are thinking ?
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le dim. 4 déc. 2022 à 16:32, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> Any updates here?
>>
>> Enrico
>>
>> Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha scritto:
>>
>> > I concur with Enrico,
>> > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
>> > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
>> > issues and requests.
>> >
>> > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step,
>> but
>> > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
>> >
>> > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
>> > keeping live the project.
>> >
>> > Juan
>> >
>> > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org
>> >
>> > > ha scritto:
>> > > >
>> > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members
>> plan to
>> > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
>> > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
>> help
>> > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
>> > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
>> > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
>> anyone
>> > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>> > > >
>> > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
>> > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like
>> to
>> > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
>> > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community
>> support.
>> > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
>> > >
>> > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
>> > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
>> > > - security fixes
>> > > - responding to user requests
>> > >
>> > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
>> > > need many new features
>> > > and they are pretty stable,
>> > >
>> > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
>> > > supported providers,
>> > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
>> > >
>> > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
>> > > engaging more with the well known
>> > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
>> > > JClouds
>> > >
>> > > my 2 cents
>> > > Enrico
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> wrote:
>> > > > > Hi guys,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > thanks for your update !
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
>> > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
>> > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
>> > > Minho here)
>> > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
>> and
>> > > > > inform the board
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thoughts ?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > JB
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <
>> juan@cloudsoft.io>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
>> and
>> > > joining
>> > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > Juan
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
>> geomacy@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
>> be
>> > > helpful.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> > > jb@nanthrax.net>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > > JB
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
>> > > écrit :
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Hi,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
>> help
>> > > to join
>> > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project
>> alive if
>> > > anybody
>> > > > > > > is
>> > > > > > > > > ok.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Francois
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
>> > had
>> > > missed
>> > > > > > > it
>> > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
>> > > today.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
>> > > confess I am
>> > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
>> > > critical
>> > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
>> for
>> > > Brooklyn
>> > > > > > > if
>> > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
>> about
>> > > the
>> > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
>> > > that is
>> > > > > > > > > > another issue.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC
>> guidelines
>> > on
>> > > moving
>> > > > > > > to
>> > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to
>> the
>> > > Attic is
>> > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of
>> active
>> > PMC
>> > > > > > > members"
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
>> > > community
>> > > > > > > members
>> > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
>> the
>> > > worst
>> > > > > > > comes
>> > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
>> > > re-establishing it with
>> > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
>> within
>> > > Jclouds
>> > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
>> > > willing to
>> > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
>> > options
>> > > could be
>> > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
>> some
>> > > community
>> > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
>> > > > > > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
>> gaul@apache.org
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
>> > > > > > > contributors in
>> > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
>> > > despite
>> > > > > > > growing
>> > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
>> > for
>> > > > > > > jclouds-core
>> > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
>> has
>> > > shrunk
>> > > > > > > and we
>> > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
>> > that
>> > > the
>> > > > > > > project
>> > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
>> > project,
>> > > e.g.,
>> > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
>> > > mailing list
>> > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
>> > > Does anyone
>> > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to
>> help
>> > > out?
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before
>> retiring
>> > the
>> > > > > > > project.
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> --
>> > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
>> > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > François
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
>> > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
>> > Cloud
>> > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
>> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>> > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>> > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Andrew Gaul
>> > > > http://gaul.org/
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Juan Cabrerizo
>> > Senior Software Engineer
>> >
>> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
>> > juan@cloudsoft.io
>> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>> >
>>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Oh and also Francois said he’s volunteer.

So I would propose to reshape the PMC to include volunteer guys.

Thoughts ?

Regards
JB

Le mar. 6 déc. 2022 à 13:12, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> a
écrit :

> Hi
>
> I was about to reply.
>
> As it seems we have interest and volunteers, if the current PMC members
> agree, we could extend the PMC to have new active people.
>
> As said I’m volunteer with Enrico to maintain jclouds as it used in other
> Apache projects.
>
> What the other PMC members are thinking ?
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le dim. 4 déc. 2022 à 16:32, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> Any updates here?
>>
>> Enrico
>>
>> Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha scritto:
>>
>> > I concur with Enrico,
>> > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
>> > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
>> > issues and requests.
>> >
>> > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step,
>> but
>> > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
>> >
>> > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
>> > keeping live the project.
>> >
>> > Juan
>> >
>> > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org
>> >
>> > > ha scritto:
>> > > >
>> > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members
>> plan to
>> > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
>> > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
>> help
>> > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
>> > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
>> > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
>> anyone
>> > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>> > > >
>> > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
>> > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like
>> to
>> > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
>> > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community
>> support.
>> > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
>> > >
>> > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
>> > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
>> > > - security fixes
>> > > - responding to user requests
>> > >
>> > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
>> > > need many new features
>> > > and they are pretty stable,
>> > >
>> > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
>> > > supported providers,
>> > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
>> > >
>> > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
>> > > engaging more with the well known
>> > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
>> > > JClouds
>> > >
>> > > my 2 cents
>> > > Enrico
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> wrote:
>> > > > > Hi guys,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > thanks for your update !
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
>> > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
>> > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
>> > > Minho here)
>> > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
>> and
>> > > > > inform the board
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thoughts ?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > JB
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <
>> juan@cloudsoft.io>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
>> and
>> > > joining
>> > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > Juan
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
>> geomacy@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
>> be
>> > > helpful.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> > > jb@nanthrax.net>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > > JB
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
>> > > écrit :
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Hi,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
>> help
>> > > to join
>> > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project
>> alive if
>> > > anybody
>> > > > > > > is
>> > > > > > > > > ok.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Francois
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
>> > had
>> > > missed
>> > > > > > > it
>> > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
>> > > today.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
>> > > confess I am
>> > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
>> > > critical
>> > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
>> for
>> > > Brooklyn
>> > > > > > > if
>> > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
>> about
>> > > the
>> > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
>> > > that is
>> > > > > > > > > > another issue.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC
>> guidelines
>> > on
>> > > moving
>> > > > > > > to
>> > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to
>> the
>> > > Attic is
>> > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of
>> active
>> > PMC
>> > > > > > > members"
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
>> > > community
>> > > > > > > members
>> > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
>> the
>> > > worst
>> > > > > > > comes
>> > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
>> > > re-establishing it with
>> > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
>> within
>> > > Jclouds
>> > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
>> > > willing to
>> > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
>> > options
>> > > could be
>> > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
>> some
>> > > community
>> > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
>> > > > > > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
>> gaul@apache.org
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
>> > > > > > > contributors in
>> > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
>> > > despite
>> > > > > > > growing
>> > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
>> > for
>> > > > > > > jclouds-core
>> > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
>> has
>> > > shrunk
>> > > > > > > and we
>> > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
>> > that
>> > > the
>> > > > > > > project
>> > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
>> > project,
>> > > e.g.,
>> > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
>> > > mailing list
>> > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
>> > > Does anyone
>> > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to
>> help
>> > > out?
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before
>> retiring
>> > the
>> > > > > > > project.
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> --
>> > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
>> > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > François
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
>> > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
>> > Cloud
>> > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
>> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>> > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>> > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Andrew Gaul
>> > > > http://gaul.org/
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Juan Cabrerizo
>> > Senior Software Engineer
>> >
>> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
>> > juan@cloudsoft.io
>> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>> >
>>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi

I was about to reply.

As it seems we have interest and volunteers, if the current PMC members
agree, we could extend the PMC to have new active people.

As said I’m volunteer with Enrico to maintain jclouds as it used in other
Apache projects.

What the other PMC members are thinking ?

Regards
JB

Le dim. 4 déc. 2022 à 16:32, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> a écrit :

> Any updates here?
>
> Enrico
>
> Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha scritto:
>
> > I concur with Enrico,
> > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> > issues and requests.
> >
> > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> >
> > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> > keeping live the project.
> >
> > Juan
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > > ha scritto:
> > > >
> > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan
> to
> > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
> help
> > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > >
> > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> anyone
> > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > >
> > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > >
> > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > - security fixes
> > > - responding to user requests
> > >
> > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > need many new features
> > > and they are pretty stable,
> > >
> > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > > supported providers,
> > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > >
> > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > > engaging more with the well known
> > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > > JClouds
> > >
> > > my 2 cents
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > >
> > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > > Minho here)
> > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
> and
> > > > > inform the board
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <juan@cloudsoft.io
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
> and
> > > joining
> > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Juan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> geomacy@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
> be
> > > helpful.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > > écrit :
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
> help
> > > to join
> > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive
> if
> > > anybody
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> > had
> > > missed
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > > today.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
> for
> > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> about
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> > on
> > > moving
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> > PMC
> > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > community
> > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
> the
> > > worst
> > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> within
> > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > options
> > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
> some
> > > community
> > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> gaul@apache.org
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > > despite
> > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> > for
> > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
> has
> > > shrunk
> > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> > that
> > > the
> > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > project,
> > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > > out?
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> > the
> > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> > Cloud
> > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > http://gaul.org/
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juan Cabrerizo
> > Senior Software Engineer
> >
> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi

I was about to reply.

As it seems we have interest and volunteers, if the current PMC members
agree, we could extend the PMC to have new active people.

As said I’m volunteer with Enrico to maintain jclouds as it used in other
Apache projects.

What the other PMC members are thinking ?

Regards
JB

Le dim. 4 déc. 2022 à 16:32, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> a écrit :

> Any updates here?
>
> Enrico
>
> Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha scritto:
>
> > I concur with Enrico,
> > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> > issues and requests.
> >
> > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> >
> > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> > keeping live the project.
> >
> > Juan
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > > ha scritto:
> > > >
> > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan
> to
> > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
> help
> > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > >
> > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> anyone
> > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > >
> > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > >
> > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > - security fixes
> > > - responding to user requests
> > >
> > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > need many new features
> > > and they are pretty stable,
> > >
> > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > > supported providers,
> > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > >
> > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > > engaging more with the well known
> > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > > JClouds
> > >
> > > my 2 cents
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > >
> > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > > Minho here)
> > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
> and
> > > > > inform the board
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <juan@cloudsoft.io
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
> and
> > > joining
> > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Juan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> geomacy@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
> be
> > > helpful.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > > écrit :
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
> help
> > > to join
> > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive
> if
> > > anybody
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> > had
> > > missed
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > > today.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
> for
> > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> about
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> > on
> > > moving
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> > PMC
> > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > community
> > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
> the
> > > worst
> > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> within
> > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > options
> > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
> some
> > > community
> > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> gaul@apache.org
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > > despite
> > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> > for
> > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
> has
> > > shrunk
> > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> > that
> > > the
> > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > project,
> > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > > out?
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> > the
> > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> > Cloud
> > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > http://gaul.org/
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juan Cabrerizo
> > Senior Software Engineer
> >
> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>]

Any updates here?

Enrico

Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha scritto:

> I concur with Enrico,
> First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> issues and requests.
>
> Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
>
> That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> keeping live the project.
>
> Juan
>
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > ha scritto:
> > >
> > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan to
> > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous help
> > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > >
> > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > >
> > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> >
> > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > - security fixes
> > - responding to user requests
> >
> > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > need many new features
> > and they are pretty stable,
> >
> > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > supported providers,
> > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> >
> > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > engaging more with the well known
> > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > JClouds
> >
> > my 2 cents
> > Enrico
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > >
> > > > thanks for your update !
> > > >
> > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > Minho here)
> > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> > > > inform the board
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts ?
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and
> > joining
> > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Juan
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be
> > helpful.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > écrit :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help
> > to join
> > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if
> > anybody
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> had
> > missed
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > today.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > critical
> > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for
> > Brooklyn
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about
> > the
> > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > that is
> > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> on
> > moving
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> PMC
> > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > community
> > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the
> > worst
> > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within
> > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > willing to
> > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> options
> > could be
> > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some
> > community
> > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org
> >
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > despite
> > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> for
> > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has
> > shrunk
> > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> that
> > the
> > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> project,
> > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > mailing list
> > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > out?
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> the
> > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > >
> > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> Cloud
> > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Gaul
> > > http://gaul.org/
> >
>
>
> --
> Juan Cabrerizo
> Senior Software Engineer
>
> *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> juan@cloudsoft.io
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>]

Any updates here?

Enrico

Il Mer 16 Nov 2022, 16:53 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> ha scritto:

> I concur with Enrico,
> First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> issues and requests.
>
> Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
>
> That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> keeping live the project.
>
> Juan
>
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > ha scritto:
> > >
> > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan to
> > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous help
> > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > >
> > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > >
> > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> >
> > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > - security fixes
> > - responding to user requests
> >
> > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > need many new features
> > and they are pretty stable,
> >
> > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > supported providers,
> > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> >
> > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > engaging more with the well known
> > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > JClouds
> >
> > my 2 cents
> > Enrico
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > >
> > > > thanks for your update !
> > > >
> > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > Minho here)
> > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> > > > inform the board
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts ?
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and
> > joining
> > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Juan
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be
> > helpful.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > écrit :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help
> > to join
> > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if
> > anybody
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> had
> > missed
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > today.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > critical
> > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for
> > Brooklyn
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about
> > the
> > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > that is
> > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> on
> > moving
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> PMC
> > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > community
> > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the
> > worst
> > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within
> > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > willing to
> > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> options
> > could be
> > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some
> > community
> > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org
> >
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > despite
> > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> for
> > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has
> > shrunk
> > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> that
> > the
> > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> project,
> > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > mailing list
> > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > out?
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> the
> > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > >
> > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> Cloud
> > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Gaul
> > > http://gaul.org/
> >
>
>
> --
> Juan Cabrerizo
> Senior Software Engineer
>
> *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> juan@cloudsoft.io
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io>]

I'm in the same boat than Iuliana, jclouds is critical for Brooklyn, happy
to join the team to keep the things running smoothly.

Juan

On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, 15:56 Jean-Baptiste Onofré, <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:

> That's also my point (sorry I was probably not clear): we still have
> PMC active, so, I just propose to move forward with maintenance and
> releases, and follow the regular process to add new committers/PMC
> members when it makes sense.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 7:17 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Andrew's point earlier in this thread was that jclouds needs people not
> > people on the PMC as such but people to help with
> >
> > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> >
> > and with testing releases.
> >
> > To be honest I don't think I would have enough personal bandwidth to help
> > much with that.
> >
> > Regards
> > Geoff
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 14:53, Iuliana Cosmina <iu...@cloudsoft.io>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello All,
> > >
> > >
> > > Jclouds is a core component of Apache Brooklyn, which is a project
> that is
> > > very dear to my heart.
> > >
> > > This being said, I would like to volunteer as well to keep jclouds
> secure
> > > and evolving.
> > >
> > > Iuliana
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, 07:54 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I concur with Enrico,
> > > > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be
> secure.
> > > > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding
> to
> > > > issues and requests.
> > > >
> > > > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next
> step, but
> > > > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> > > >
> > > > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough
> for
> > > > keeping live the project.
> > > >
> > > > Juan
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <
> gaul@apache.org>
> > > > > ha scritto:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members
> plan
> > > to
> > > > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.
> For
> > > > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no
> previous
> > > help
> > > > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project,
> e.g.,
> > > > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing
> list
> > > > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> > > anyone
> > > > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy
> which
> > > > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would
> like to
> > > > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork
> but
> > > > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community
> support.
> > > > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > > > >
> > > > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > > > - security fixes
> > > > > - responding to user requests
> > > > >
> > > > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > > > need many new features
> > > > > and they are pretty stable,
> > > > >
> > > > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of
> the
> > > > > supported providers,
> > > > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > > > >
> > > > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little
> bit by
> > > > > engaging more with the well known
> > > > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they
> use
> > > > > JClouds
> > > > >
> > > > > my 2 cents
> > > > > Enrico
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention
> Karaf
> > > > > Minho here)
> > > > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on
> vote
> > > and
> > > > > > > inform the board
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <
> juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help
> JClouds
> > > and
> > > > > joining
> > > > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > Juan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> > > geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that
> would
> > > be
> > > > > helpful.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org>
> a
> > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose
> our
> > > help
> > > > > to join
> > > > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project
> alive
> > > if
> > > > > anybody
> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I
> confess I
> > > > had
> > > > > missed
> > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of
> it
> > > > > today.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I
> must
> > > > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the
> implications
> > > for
> > > > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> > > about
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community,
> but
> > > > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC
> guidelines
> > > > on
> > > > > moving
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move
> to the
> > > > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of
> active
> > > > PMC
> > > > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > > > community
> > > > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable.
> If
> > > the
> > > > > worst
> > > > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> > > within
> > > > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members
> would be
> > > > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > > > options
> > > > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such
> as
> > > some
> > > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> > > gaul@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits
> from 26
> > > > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This
> is
> > > > > despite
> > > > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to
> 80,000
> > > > for
> > > > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active
> committers
> > > has
> > > > > shrunk
> > > > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This
> means
> > > > that
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > > > project,
> > > > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding
> to
> > > > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers
> themselves.
> > > > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to
> help
> > > > > out?
> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before
> retiring
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to
> the
> > > > Cloud
> > > > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > >
> > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > >
> > >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

That's also my point (sorry I was probably not clear): we still have
PMC active, so, I just propose to move forward with maintenance and
releases, and follow the regular process to add new committers/PMC
members when it makes sense.

Regards
JB

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 7:17 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Andrew's point earlier in this thread was that jclouds needs people not
> people on the PMC as such but people to help with
>
> > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>
> and with testing releases.
>
> To be honest I don't think I would have enough personal bandwidth to help
> much with that.
>
> Regards
> Geoff
>
>
>
> On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 14:53, Iuliana Cosmina <iu...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> >
> > Jclouds is a core component of Apache Brooklyn, which is a project that is
> > very dear to my heart.
> >
> > This being said, I would like to volunteer as well to keep jclouds secure
> > and evolving.
> >
> > Iuliana
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, 07:54 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
> >
> > > I concur with Enrico,
> > > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> > > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> > > issues and requests.
> > >
> > > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> > > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> > >
> > > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> > > keeping live the project.
> > >
> > > Juan
> > >
> > > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > > > ha scritto:
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan
> > to
> > > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
> > help
> > > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> > anyone
> > > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > >
> > > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > > >
> > > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > > - security fixes
> > > > - responding to user requests
> > > >
> > > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > > need many new features
> > > > and they are pretty stable,
> > > >
> > > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > > > supported providers,
> > > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > > >
> > > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > > > engaging more with the well known
> > > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > > > JClouds
> > > >
> > > > my 2 cents
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > > > Minho here)
> > > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
> > and
> > > > > > inform the board
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <juan@cloudsoft.io
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
> > and
> > > > joining
> > > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Juan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> > geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
> > be
> > > > helpful.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
> > help
> > > > to join
> > > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive
> > if
> > > > anybody
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> > > had
> > > > missed
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > > > today.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
> > for
> > > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> > about
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> > > on
> > > > moving
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> > > PMC
> > > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > > community
> > > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
> > the
> > > > worst
> > > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> > within
> > > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > > options
> > > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
> > some
> > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> > gaul@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > > > despite
> > > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> > > for
> > > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
> > has
> > > > shrunk
> > > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> > > that
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > > project,
> > > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > > > out?
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> > > the
> > > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> > > Cloud
> > > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > Senior Software Engineer
> > >
> > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > >
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

(To be clear: I would love to help out, I just doubt I would be much use.
Sorry!)

On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 18:17, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Andrew's point earlier in this thread was that jclouds needs people not
> people on the PMC as such but people to help with
>
> > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>
> and with testing releases.
>
> To be honest I don't think I would have enough personal bandwidth to help
> much with that.
>
> Regards
> Geoff
>
>
>
> On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 14:53, Iuliana Cosmina <iu...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
>
>> Hello All,
>>
>>
>> Jclouds is a core component of Apache Brooklyn, which is a project that is
>> very dear to my heart.
>>
>> This being said, I would like to volunteer as well to keep jclouds secure
>> and evolving.
>>
>> Iuliana
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, 07:54 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
>>
>> > I concur with Enrico,
>> > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
>> > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
>> > issues and requests.
>> >
>> > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step,
>> but
>> > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
>> >
>> > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
>> > keeping live the project.
>> >
>> > Juan
>> >
>> > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org
>> >
>> > > ha scritto:
>> > > >
>> > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members
>> plan to
>> > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
>> > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
>> help
>> > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
>> > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
>> > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
>> anyone
>> > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>> > > >
>> > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
>> > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like
>> to
>> > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
>> > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community
>> support.
>> > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
>> > >
>> > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
>> > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
>> > > - security fixes
>> > > - responding to user requests
>> > >
>> > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
>> > > need many new features
>> > > and they are pretty stable,
>> > >
>> > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
>> > > supported providers,
>> > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
>> > >
>> > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
>> > > engaging more with the well known
>> > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
>> > > JClouds
>> > >
>> > > my 2 cents
>> > > Enrico
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> wrote:
>> > > > > Hi guys,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > thanks for your update !
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
>> > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
>> > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
>> > > Minho here)
>> > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
>> and
>> > > > > inform the board
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thoughts ?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > JB
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <
>> juan@cloudsoft.io>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
>> and
>> > > joining
>> > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > Juan
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
>> geomacy@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
>> be
>> > > helpful.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> > > jb@nanthrax.net>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > > JB
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
>> > > écrit :
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Hi,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
>> help
>> > > to join
>> > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project
>> alive if
>> > > anybody
>> > > > > > > is
>> > > > > > > > > ok.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Francois
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
>> > had
>> > > missed
>> > > > > > > it
>> > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
>> > > today.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
>> > > confess I am
>> > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
>> > > critical
>> > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
>> for
>> > > Brooklyn
>> > > > > > > if
>> > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
>> about
>> > > the
>> > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
>> > > that is
>> > > > > > > > > > another issue.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC
>> guidelines
>> > on
>> > > moving
>> > > > > > > to
>> > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to
>> the
>> > > Attic is
>> > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of
>> active
>> > PMC
>> > > > > > > members"
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
>> > > community
>> > > > > > > members
>> > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
>> the
>> > > worst
>> > > > > > > comes
>> > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
>> > > re-establishing it with
>> > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
>> within
>> > > Jclouds
>> > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
>> > > willing to
>> > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
>> > options
>> > > could be
>> > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
>> some
>> > > community
>> > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
>> > > > > > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
>> gaul@apache.org
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
>> > > > > > > contributors in
>> > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
>> > > despite
>> > > > > > > growing
>> > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
>> > for
>> > > > > > > jclouds-core
>> > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
>> has
>> > > shrunk
>> > > > > > > and we
>> > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
>> > that
>> > > the
>> > > > > > > project
>> > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
>> > project,
>> > > e.g.,
>> > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
>> > > mailing list
>> > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
>> > > Does anyone
>> > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to
>> help
>> > > out?
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before
>> retiring
>> > the
>> > > > > > > project.
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> --
>> > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
>> > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > François
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
>> > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
>> > Cloud
>> > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
>> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>> > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>> > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Andrew Gaul
>> > > > http://gaul.org/
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Juan Cabrerizo
>> > Senior Software Engineer
>> >
>> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
>> > juan@cloudsoft.io
>> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>> >
>>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

(To be clear: I would love to help out, I just doubt I would be much use.
Sorry!)

On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 18:17, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Andrew's point earlier in this thread was that jclouds needs people not
> people on the PMC as such but people to help with
>
> > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>
> and with testing releases.
>
> To be honest I don't think I would have enough personal bandwidth to help
> much with that.
>
> Regards
> Geoff
>
>
>
> On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 14:53, Iuliana Cosmina <iu...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
>
>> Hello All,
>>
>>
>> Jclouds is a core component of Apache Brooklyn, which is a project that is
>> very dear to my heart.
>>
>> This being said, I would like to volunteer as well to keep jclouds secure
>> and evolving.
>>
>> Iuliana
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, 07:54 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
>>
>> > I concur with Enrico,
>> > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
>> > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
>> > issues and requests.
>> >
>> > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step,
>> but
>> > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
>> >
>> > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
>> > keeping live the project.
>> >
>> > Juan
>> >
>> > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org
>> >
>> > > ha scritto:
>> > > >
>> > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members
>> plan to
>> > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
>> > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
>> help
>> > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
>> > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
>> > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
>> anyone
>> > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>> > > >
>> > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
>> > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like
>> to
>> > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
>> > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community
>> support.
>> > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
>> > >
>> > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
>> > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
>> > > - security fixes
>> > > - responding to user requests
>> > >
>> > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
>> > > need many new features
>> > > and they are pretty stable,
>> > >
>> > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
>> > > supported providers,
>> > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
>> > >
>> > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
>> > > engaging more with the well known
>> > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
>> > > JClouds
>> > >
>> > > my 2 cents
>> > > Enrico
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> wrote:
>> > > > > Hi guys,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > thanks for your update !
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
>> > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
>> > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
>> > > Minho here)
>> > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
>> and
>> > > > > inform the board
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thoughts ?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > JB
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <
>> juan@cloudsoft.io>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
>> and
>> > > joining
>> > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > Juan
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
>> geomacy@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
>> be
>> > > helpful.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> > > jb@nanthrax.net>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > > JB
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
>> > > écrit :
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Hi,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
>> help
>> > > to join
>> > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project
>> alive if
>> > > anybody
>> > > > > > > is
>> > > > > > > > > ok.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Francois
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
>> > had
>> > > missed
>> > > > > > > it
>> > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
>> > > today.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
>> > > confess I am
>> > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
>> > > critical
>> > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
>> for
>> > > Brooklyn
>> > > > > > > if
>> > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
>> about
>> > > the
>> > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
>> > > that is
>> > > > > > > > > > another issue.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC
>> guidelines
>> > on
>> > > moving
>> > > > > > > to
>> > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to
>> the
>> > > Attic is
>> > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of
>> active
>> > PMC
>> > > > > > > members"
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
>> > > community
>> > > > > > > members
>> > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
>> the
>> > > worst
>> > > > > > > comes
>> > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
>> > > re-establishing it with
>> > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
>> within
>> > > Jclouds
>> > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
>> > > willing to
>> > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
>> > options
>> > > could be
>> > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
>> some
>> > > community
>> > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
>> > > > > > > > > > Geoff
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
>> gaul@apache.org
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
>> > > > > > > contributors in
>> > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
>> > > despite
>> > > > > > > growing
>> > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
>> > for
>> > > > > > > jclouds-core
>> > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
>> has
>> > > shrunk
>> > > > > > > and we
>> > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
>> > that
>> > > the
>> > > > > > > project
>> > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
>> > project,
>> > > e.g.,
>> > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
>> > > mailing list
>> > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
>> > > Does anyone
>> > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to
>> help
>> > > out?
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before
>> retiring
>> > the
>> > > > > > > project.
>> > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > >> --
>> > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
>> > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > François
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
>> > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
>> > Cloud
>> > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
>> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>> > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>> > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Andrew Gaul
>> > > > http://gaul.org/
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Juan Cabrerizo
>> > Senior Software Engineer
>> >
>> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
>> > juan@cloudsoft.io
>> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
>> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
>> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>> >
>>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

That's also my point (sorry I was probably not clear): we still have
PMC active, so, I just propose to move forward with maintenance and
releases, and follow the regular process to add new committers/PMC
members when it makes sense.

Regards
JB

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 7:17 PM Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Andrew's point earlier in this thread was that jclouds needs people not
> people on the PMC as such but people to help with
>
> > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>
> and with testing releases.
>
> To be honest I don't think I would have enough personal bandwidth to help
> much with that.
>
> Regards
> Geoff
>
>
>
> On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 14:53, Iuliana Cosmina <iu...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> >
> > Jclouds is a core component of Apache Brooklyn, which is a project that is
> > very dear to my heart.
> >
> > This being said, I would like to volunteer as well to keep jclouds secure
> > and evolving.
> >
> > Iuliana
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, 07:54 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
> >
> > > I concur with Enrico,
> > > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> > > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> > > issues and requests.
> > >
> > > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> > > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> > >
> > > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> > > keeping live the project.
> > >
> > > Juan
> > >
> > > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > > > ha scritto:
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan
> > to
> > > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
> > help
> > > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> > anyone
> > > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > >
> > > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > > >
> > > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > > - security fixes
> > > > - responding to user requests
> > > >
> > > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > > need many new features
> > > > and they are pretty stable,
> > > >
> > > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > > > supported providers,
> > > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > > >
> > > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > > > engaging more with the well known
> > > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > > > JClouds
> > > >
> > > > my 2 cents
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > > > Minho here)
> > > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
> > and
> > > > > > inform the board
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <juan@cloudsoft.io
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
> > and
> > > > joining
> > > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Juan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> > geomacy@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
> > be
> > > > helpful.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
> > help
> > > > to join
> > > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive
> > if
> > > > anybody
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> > > had
> > > > missed
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > > > today.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
> > for
> > > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> > about
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> > > on
> > > > moving
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> > > PMC
> > > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > > community
> > > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
> > the
> > > > worst
> > > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> > within
> > > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > > options
> > > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
> > some
> > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> > gaul@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > > > despite
> > > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> > > for
> > > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
> > has
> > > > shrunk
> > > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> > > that
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > > project,
> > > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > > > out?
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> > > the
> > > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> > > Cloud
> > > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > Senior Software Engineer
> > >
> > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > >
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Hi all,

Andrew's point earlier in this thread was that jclouds needs people not
people on the PMC as such but people to help with

> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?

and with testing releases.

To be honest I don't think I would have enough personal bandwidth to help
much with that.

Regards
Geoff



On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 14:53, Iuliana Cosmina <iu...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:

> Hello All,
>
>
> Jclouds is a core component of Apache Brooklyn, which is a project that is
> very dear to my heart.
>
> This being said, I would like to volunteer as well to keep jclouds secure
> and evolving.
>
> Iuliana
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, 07:54 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
>
> > I concur with Enrico,
> > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> > issues and requests.
> >
> > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> >
> > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> > keeping live the project.
> >
> > Juan
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > > ha scritto:
> > > >
> > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan
> to
> > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
> help
> > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > >
> > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> anyone
> > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > >
> > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > >
> > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > - security fixes
> > > - responding to user requests
> > >
> > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > need many new features
> > > and they are pretty stable,
> > >
> > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > > supported providers,
> > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > >
> > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > > engaging more with the well known
> > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > > JClouds
> > >
> > > my 2 cents
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > >
> > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > > Minho here)
> > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
> and
> > > > > inform the board
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <juan@cloudsoft.io
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
> and
> > > joining
> > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Juan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> geomacy@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
> be
> > > helpful.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > > écrit :
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
> help
> > > to join
> > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive
> if
> > > anybody
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> > had
> > > missed
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > > today.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
> for
> > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> about
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> > on
> > > moving
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> > PMC
> > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > community
> > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
> the
> > > worst
> > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> within
> > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > options
> > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
> some
> > > community
> > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> gaul@apache.org
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > > despite
> > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> > for
> > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
> has
> > > shrunk
> > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> > that
> > > the
> > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > project,
> > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > > out?
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> > the
> > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> > Cloud
> > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > http://gaul.org/
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juan Cabrerizo
> > Senior Software Engineer
> >
> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Hi all,

Andrew's point earlier in this thread was that jclouds needs people not
people on the PMC as such but people to help with

> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?

and with testing releases.

To be honest I don't think I would have enough personal bandwidth to help
much with that.

Regards
Geoff



On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 14:53, Iuliana Cosmina <iu...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:

> Hello All,
>
>
> Jclouds is a core component of Apache Brooklyn, which is a project that is
> very dear to my heart.
>
> This being said, I would like to volunteer as well to keep jclouds secure
> and evolving.
>
> Iuliana
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, 07:54 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
>
> > I concur with Enrico,
> > First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> > Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> > issues and requests.
> >
> > Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> > it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
> >
> > That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> > keeping live the project.
> >
> > Juan
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > > ha scritto:
> > > >
> > > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan
> to
> > > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous
> help
> > > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > > >
> > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does
> anyone
> > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > >
> > > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> > >
> > > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > > - security fixes
> > > - responding to user requests
> > >
> > > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > > need many new features
> > > and they are pretty stable,
> > >
> > > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > > supported providers,
> > > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> > >
> > > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > > engaging more with the well known
> > > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > > JClouds
> > >
> > > my 2 cents
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks for your update !
> > > > >
> > > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > > Minho here)
> > > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote
> and
> > > > > inform the board
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <juan@cloudsoft.io
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds
> and
> > > joining
> > > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Juan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <
> geomacy@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would
> be
> > > helpful.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > > écrit :
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our
> help
> > > to join
> > > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive
> if
> > > anybody
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> > had
> > > missed
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > > today.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > > critical
> > > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications
> for
> > > Brooklyn
> > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case
> about
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> > on
> > > moving
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> > PMC
> > > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > > community
> > > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If
> the
> > > worst
> > > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll
> within
> > > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > > willing to
> > > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> > options
> > > could be
> > > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as
> some
> > > community
> > > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <
> gaul@apache.org
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > > despite
> > > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> > for
> > > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers
> has
> > > shrunk
> > > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> > that
> > > the
> > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> > project,
> > > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > > mailing list
> > > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > > out?
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> > the
> > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> > Cloud
> > > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > http://gaul.org/
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juan Cabrerizo
> > Senior Software Engineer
> >
> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> >
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Iuliana Cosmina <iu...@cloudsoft.io>]

Hello All,


Jclouds is a core component of Apache Brooklyn, which is a project that is
very dear to my heart.

This being said, I would like to volunteer as well to keep jclouds secure
and evolving.

Iuliana






On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, 07:54 Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:

> I concur with Enrico,
> First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
> Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
> issues and requests.
>
> Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
> it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.
>
> That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
> keeping live the project.
>
> Juan
>
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> > ha scritto:
> > >
> > > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan to
> > > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous help
> > > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> > >
> > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > >
> > > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > > How will this change under a new PMC set?
> >
> > (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> > In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> > - security fixes
> > - responding to user requests
> >
> > There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> > need many new features
> > and they are pretty stable,
> >
> > In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> > supported providers,
> > but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
> >
> > Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> > engaging more with the well known
> > projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> > JClouds
> >
> > my 2 cents
> > Enrico
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > >
> > > > thanks for your update !
> > > >
> > > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> > Minho here)
> > > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> > > > inform the board
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts ?
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and
> > joining
> > > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Juan
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be
> > helpful.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> > écrit :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help
> > to join
> > > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if
> > anybody
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I
> had
> > missed
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> > today.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> > confess I am
> > > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> > critical
> > > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for
> > Brooklyn
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about
> > the
> > > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> > that is
> > > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines
> on
> > moving
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> > Attic is
> > > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active
> PMC
> > > > > > members"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> > community
> > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the
> > worst
> > > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> > re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within
> > Jclouds
> > > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> > willing to
> > > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other
> options
> > could be
> > > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some
> > community
> > > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org
> >
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> > despite
> > > > > > growing
> > > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000
> for
> > > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has
> > shrunk
> > > > > > and we
> > > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means
> that
> > the
> > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the
> project,
> > e.g.,
> > > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> > mailing list
> > > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> > Does anyone
> > > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> > out?
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring
> the
> > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > >
> > > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the
> Cloud
> > > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Gaul
> > > http://gaul.org/
> >
>
>
> --
> Juan Cabrerizo
> Senior Software Engineer
>
> *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> juan@cloudsoft.io
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io>]

I concur with Enrico,
First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
issues and requests.

Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.

That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
keeping live the project.

Juan

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> ha scritto:
> >
> > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan to
> > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous help
> > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> >
> > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> >
> > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > How will this change under a new PMC set?
>
> (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> - security fixes
> - responding to user requests
>
> There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> need many new features
> and they are pretty stable,
>
> In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> supported providers,
> but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
>
> Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> engaging more with the well known
> projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> JClouds
>
> my 2 cents
> Enrico
>
>
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > thanks for your update !
> > >
> > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> Minho here)
> > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> > > inform the board
> > >
> > > Thoughts ?
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and
> joining
> > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Juan
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be
> helpful.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help
> to join
> > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if
> anybody
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had
> missed
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> today.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> confess I am
> > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> critical
> > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for
> Brooklyn
> > > > > if
> > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about
> the
> > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> that is
> > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on
> moving
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> Attic is
> > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > > > > members"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> community
> > > > > members
> > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the
> worst
> > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within
> Jclouds
> > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> willing to
> > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options
> could be
> > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some
> community
> > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> despite
> > > > > growing
> > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has
> shrunk
> > > > > and we
> > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that
> the
> > > > > project
> > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project,
> e.g.,
> > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> mailing list
> > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> Does anyone
> > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> out?
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > > > > project.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > François
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > >
> > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/
>


-- 
Juan Cabrerizo
Senior Software Engineer

*Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
juan@cloudsoft.io
https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
https://github.com/jcabrerizo
<https://github.com/jcabrerizo>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io>]

I concur with Enrico,
First warranty the Jclouds is patched when needed. it has to be secure.
Then keep alive the community of users/dependent projects responding to
issues and requests.

Adding new cloud providers features seems to be for me the next step, but
it depends on the evolution on the necessities and other tooling.

That's what I had in mind when I volunteered and I think is enough for
keeping live the project.

Juan

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 11:14, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> ha scritto:
> >
> > I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan to
> > do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> > example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous help
> > testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
> >
> > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> >
> > jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> > accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> > see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> > currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> > How will this change under a new PMC set?
>
> (I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
> In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
> - security fixes
> - responding to user requests
>
> There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
> need many new features
> and they are pretty stable,
>
> In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
> supported providers,
> but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.
>
> Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
> engaging more with the well known
> projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use
> JClouds
>
> my 2 cents
> Enrico
>
>
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > thanks for your update !
> > >
> > > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > > 1. PMC set proposal
> > > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf
> Minho here)
> > > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> > > inform the board
> > >
> > > Thoughts ?
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and
> joining
> > > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Juan
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be
> helpful.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a
> écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help
> to join
> > > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if
> anybody
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > ok.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Francois
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had
> missed
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it
> today.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must
> confess I am
> > > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most
> critical
> > > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for
> Brooklyn
> > > > > if
> > > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about
> the
> > > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but
> that is
> > > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on
> moving
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the
> Attic is
> > > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > > > > members"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing
> community
> > > > > members
> > > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the
> worst
> > > > > comes
> > > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by
> re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within
> Jclouds
> > > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be
> willing to
> > > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options
> could be
> > > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some
> community
> > > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > > contributors in
> > > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is
> despite
> > > > > growing
> > > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has
> shrunk
> > > > > and we
> > > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that
> the
> > > > > project
> > > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project,
> e.g.,
> > > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to
> mailing list
> > > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.
> Does anyone
> > > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help
> out?
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > > > > project.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > François
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > >
> > > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/
>


-- 
Juan Cabrerizo
Senior Software Engineer

*Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
juan@cloudsoft.io
https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
https://github.com/jcabrerizo
<https://github.com/jcabrerizo>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>]

Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
ha scritto:
>
> I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan to
> do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous help
> testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
>
> > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>
> jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> How will this change under a new PMC set?

(I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
- security fixes
- responding to user requests

There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
need many new features
and they are pretty stable,

In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
supported providers,
but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.

Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
engaging more with the well known
projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use JClouds

my 2 cents
Enrico


>
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > thanks for your update !
> >
> > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > 1. PMC set proposal
> > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf Minho here)
> > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> > inform the board
> >
> > Thoughts ?
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and joining
> > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Juan
> > >
> > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody
> > > > is
> > > > > > ok.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Francois
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed
> > > > it
> > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn
> > > > if
> > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving
> > > > to
> > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > > > members"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> > > > members
> > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> > > > comes
> > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > contributors in
> > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> > > > growing
> > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> > > > and we
> > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> > > > project
> > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > > > project.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > François
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > Senior Software Engineer
> > >
> > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@gmail.com>]

Hi Andrew

I take your point. I can speak only for myself, of course. I work full
time on things unconnected to Apache and the development I do in my
own time tends to be work related. I don't even get as much time as I
would like to work on Apache Brooklyn, and I would probably not be
able to devote enough time to add much value to Jclouds in the way of
PR reviews, fixes etc. I understand this won't be much help, so allow
me to retract my offer. Hopefully there will be enough interest in the
existing community to meet the need.

Regards
Geoff

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 10:59, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan to
> do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous help
> testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
>
> > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>
> jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> How will this change under a new PMC set?
>
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > thanks for your update !
> >
> > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > 1. PMC set proposal
> > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf Minho here)
> > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> > inform the board
> >
> > Thoughts ?
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and joining
> > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Juan
> > >
> > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody
> > > > is
> > > > > > ok.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Francois
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed
> > > > it
> > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn
> > > > if
> > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving
> > > > to
> > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > > > members"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> > > > members
> > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> > > > comes
> > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > contributors in
> > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> > > > growing
> > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> > > > and we
> > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> > > > project
> > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > > > project.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > François
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > Senior Software Engineer
> > >
> > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>]

Il giorno lun 14 nov 2022 alle ore 11:59 Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>
ha scritto:
>
> I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan to
> do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
> example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous help
> testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:
>
> > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>
> jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
> accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
> see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
> currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
> How will this change under a new PMC set?

(I am also volunteering, as posted in a previous message).
In order to keep a project alive we must at least guarantee:
- security fixes
- responding to user requests

There are other Apache projects that are widely used but they don't
need many new features
and they are pretty stable,

In JClouds I would expect some work to follow the new features of the
supported providers,
but this is not strictly needed, it depends on users.

Apart from "keeping it alive" we could try to boost it a little bit by
engaging more with the well known
projects that use it and ask them to advertise more about how they use JClouds

my 2 cents
Enrico


>
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > thanks for your update !
> >
> > I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> > 1. PMC set proposal
> > 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf Minho here)
> > 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> > inform the board
> >
> > Thoughts ?
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and joining
> > > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Juan
> > >
> > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I’m in ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody
> > > > is
> > > > > > ok.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Francois
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed
> > > > it
> > > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn
> > > > if
> > > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving
> > > > to
> > > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > > > members"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> > > > members
> > > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> > > > comes
> > > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > > contributors in
> > > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> > > > growing
> > > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > > > jclouds-core
> > > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> > > > and we
> > > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> > > > project
> > > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > > > project.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > François
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Juan Cabrerizo
> > > Senior Software Engineer
> > >
> > > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan to
do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous help
testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:

> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?

jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
How will this change under a new PMC set?

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> thanks for your update !
> 
> I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> 1. PMC set proposal
> 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf Minho here)
> 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> inform the board
> 
> Thoughts ?
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and joining
> > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> >
> > Regards
> > Juan
> >
> > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I’m in ;)
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody
> > > is
> > > > > ok.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Francois
> > > > >
> > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed
> > > it
> > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn
> > > if
> > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving
> > > to
> > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > > members"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> > > members
> > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> > > comes
> > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > contributors in
> > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> > > growing
> > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > > jclouds-core
> > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> > > and we
> > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> > > project
> > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > > project.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --
> > > > > François
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juan Cabrerizo
> > Senior Software Engineer
> >
> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

I would like to understand what the three potential PMC members plan to
do since jclouds already has many absentee committers and PMCs.  For
example I seen only one commit in the last 5 years and no previous help
testing releases.  Repeating my original mail:

> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?

jclouds is also a critical dependency for my project S3Proxy which
accounts for 25% of jclouds Maven Central downloads.  I would like to
see Apache jclouds continue instead of creating a private fork but
currently I do most of the maintenance with little community support.
How will this change under a new PMC set?

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:53:18AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> thanks for your update !
> 
> I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
> 1. PMC set proposal
> 2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf Minho here)
> 3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
> inform the board
> 
> Thoughts ?
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and joining
> > the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
> >
> > Regards
> > Juan
> >
> > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I’m in ;)
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody
> > > is
> > > > > ok.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Francois
> > > > >
> > > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed
> > > it
> > > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn
> > > if
> > > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > > > another issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving
> > > to
> > > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > > members"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> > > members
> > > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> > > comes
> > > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > > contributors in
> > > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> > > growing
> > > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > > jclouds-core
> > > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> > > and we
> > > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> > > project
> > > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > > project.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --
> > > > > François
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juan Cabrerizo
> > Senior Software Engineer
> >
> > *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> > juan@cloudsoft.io
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> > https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> > <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi guys,

thanks for your update !

I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
1. PMC set proposal
2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf Minho here)
3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
inform the board

Thoughts ?

Regards
JB

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
>
> Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and joining
> the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
>
> Regards
> Juan
>
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.
> >
> > Regards
> > Geoff
> >
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I’m in ;)
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody
> > is
> > > > ok.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Francois
> > > >
> > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed
> > it
> > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > > >
> > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn
> > if
> > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > > another issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving
> > to
> > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > >
> > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > members"
> > > > >
> > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> > members
> > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> > comes
> > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > >
> > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think?
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > contributors in
> > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> > growing
> > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > jclouds-core
> > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> > and we
> > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> > project
> > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > project.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > --
> > > > François
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Juan Cabrerizo
> Senior Software Engineer
>
> *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> juan@cloudsoft.io
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi guys,

thanks for your update !

I propose to prepare a quick plan describing:
1. PMC set proposal
2. Roadmap/ideas for jclouds future (I would like to mention Karaf Minho here)
3. Send the proposal on the mailing list to move forward on vote and
inform the board

Thoughts ?

Regards
JB

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:12 AM Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io> wrote:
>
> Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and joining
> the committee. It's a core dependency for us.
>
> Regards
> Juan
>
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.
> >
> > Regards
> > Geoff
> >
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I’m in ;)
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody
> > is
> > > > ok.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Francois
> > > >
> > > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed
> > it
> > > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > > >
> > > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn
> > if
> > > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > > another issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving
> > to
> > > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > > >
> > > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> > members"
> > > > >
> > > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> > members
> > > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> > comes
> > > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > > >
> > > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think?
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> > contributors in
> > > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> > growing
> > > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> > jclouds-core
> > > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> > and we
> > > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> > project
> > > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> > project.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > --
> > > > François
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Juan Cabrerizo
> Senior Software Engineer
>
> *Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
> juan@cloudsoft.io
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
> https://github.com/jcabrerizo
> <https://github.com/jcabrerizo>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io>]

Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and joining
the committee. It's a core dependency for us.

Regards
Juan

On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:

> I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.
>
> Regards
> Geoff
>
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > I’m in ;)
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody
> is
> > > ok.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Francois
> > >
> > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > >
> > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed
> it
> > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > >
> > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn
> if
> > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > another issue.
> > > >
> > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving
> to
> > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > >
> > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> members"
> > > >
> > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> members
> > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> comes
> > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > >
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> contributors in
> > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> growing
> > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> jclouds-core
> > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> and we
> > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> project
> > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > >>
> > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > >>
> > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> project.
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > >
> > > --
> > > --
> > > François
> > >
> > >
>


-- 
Juan Cabrerizo
Senior Software Engineer

*Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
juan@cloudsoft.io
https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
https://github.com/jcabrerizo
<https://github.com/jcabrerizo>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Juan Cabrerizo <ju...@cloudsoft.io>]

Hi, I'm a PMC member of Brooklyn, happy to try to help JClouds and joining
the committee. It's a core dependency for us.

Regards
Juan

On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:

> I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.
>
> Regards
> Geoff
>
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > I’m in ;)
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody
> is
> > > ok.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Francois
> > >
> > > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > >
> > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed
> it
> > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > >
> > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn
> if
> > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > another issue.
> > > >
> > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving
> to
> > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > >
> > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC
> members"
> > > >
> > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community
> members
> > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst
> comes
> > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > >
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26
> contributors in
> > > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite
> growing
> > > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for
> jclouds-core
> > > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk
> and we
> > > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the
> project
> > > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > > >>
> > > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > >>
> > > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the
> project.
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Andrew Gaul
> > > >> http://gaul.org/
> > >
> > > --
> > > --
> > > François
> > >
> > >
>


-- 
Juan Cabrerizo
Senior Software Engineer

*Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud
juan@cloudsoft.io
https://www.linkedin.com/in/juancabrerizo
https://github.com/jcabrerizo
<https://github.com/jcabrerizo>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.

Regards
Geoff

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> I’m in ;)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody is
> > ok.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Francois
> >
> > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > >
> > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed it
> > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > >
> > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn if
> > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > another issue.
> > >
> > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving to
> > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > >
> > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC members"
> > >
> > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community members
> > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst comes
> > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > a new or modified PMC".
> > >
> > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > members joining the PMC.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26 contributors in
> > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite growing
> > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for jclouds-core
> > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk and we
> > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the project
> > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > >>
> > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > >>
> > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the project.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Andrew Gaul
> > >> http://gaul.org/
> >
> > --
> > --
> > François
> >
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

I would also be willing to join the Jclouds PMC if that would be helpful.

Regards
Geoff

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> I’m in ;)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> > the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody is
> > ok.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Francois
> >
> > On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > >
> > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed it
> > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > >
> > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn if
> > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > another issue.
> > >
> > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving to
> > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > >
> > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC members"
> > >
> > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community members
> > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst comes
> > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > a new or modified PMC".
> > >
> > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > members joining the PMC.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26 contributors in
> > >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite growing
> > >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for jclouds-core
> > >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk and we
> > >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the project
> > >> must move to the Apache attic.
> > >>
> > >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > >>
> > >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the project.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Andrew Gaul
> > >> http://gaul.org/
> >
> > --
> > --
> > François
> >
> >

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

I’m in ;)

Regards
JB

Le jeu. 10 nov. 2022 à 11:56, fpapon <fp...@apache.org> a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join
> the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody is
> ok.
>
> Regards,
>
> Francois
>
> On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> >
> > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed it
> > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> >
> > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn if
> > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > another issue.
> >
> > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving to
> > the Attic [1]. These note that
> >
> > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC members"
> >
> > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community members
> > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst comes
> > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > a new or modified PMC".
> >
> > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > members joining the PMC.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Geoff
> >
> > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26 contributors in
> >> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite growing
> >> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for jclouds-core
> >> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk and we
> >> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the project
> >> must move to the Apache attic.
> >>
> >> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> >> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> >> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> >> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> >>
> >> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the project.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Andrew Gaul
> >> http://gaul.org/
>
> --
> --
> François
>
>

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[fpapon <fp...@apache.org>]

Hi,

After some discussions with JB, we are ok to propose our help to join 
the PMC of JCloud and contribute to keep the project alive if anybody is ok.

Regards,

Francois

On 09/11/2022 21:57, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
>
> I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed it
> when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
>
> Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn if
> Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> another issue.
>
> I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving to
> the Attic [1]. These note that
>
> "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC members"
>
> (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community members
> to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst comes
> to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> a new or modified PMC".
>
> Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> members joining the PMC.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Kind regards
> Geoff
>
> [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
>
>
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26 contributors in
>> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite growing
>> downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for jclouds-core
>> alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk and we
>> will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the project
>> must move to the Apache attic.
>>
>> Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
>> reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
>> queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
>> have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
>>
>> If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the project.
>>
>> --
>> Andrew Gaul
>> http://gaul.org/

-- 
--
François

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Oh, I also missed a reply to the dev@ list from Enrico Olivelli [1]

Regards
Geoff
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/kwwzhm3xhc1d2kyd16vbzormwm5xhj2l


On 2022/11/12 16:34:30 Geoff Macartney wrote:
> Hello Andrew,
> 
> I tried to reply to this thread but messed up the address (wrote "user@"), however I did send the same email to dev@, see [1]. 
> 
> We in Apache Brooklyn would certainly be unhappy to see Jclouds move to the attic. I have thought about it over the weekend and decided I would be willing to offer to join the Jclouds PMC if that will be helpful [2]. I see that Francois Papon (fpapon) has also volunteered [3], and JB is willing to continue [4].
> 
> I do agree a formal [VOTE] email would be of value. Personally I would like to see Jclouds successfully avoid the attic.
> 
> Kind regards
> Geoff Macartney
> 
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/9rlpdc5v9q2tpjcmk6bbxgf74pwkdgxy
> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/qjxrflzts889g0m5gj2ny2493q6xm9sp
> [3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/gv5g27c7qbx9rrd59fddcys5h5rckfzm
> [4] https://lists.apache.org/thread/cbp9wmzvlgqnpqc1b5rr30c33t7trc74
> 
> On 2022/11/10 12:21:08 Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > I will send out a formal [VOTE] after I run the potentially final 2.6.0
> > release.  Note that no one from the community, including anyone from the
> > Brooklyn project, volunteered to help maintain jclouds after a month's
> > notice.  I agree that this is an reversible situation but asking more
> > from the existing maintainers is unlikely to succeed.
> > 
> > On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 09:00:57PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > > Oops, fixing address for user@jclouds.apache.org.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 20:57, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > > >
> > > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed it
> > > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > > >
> > > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn if
> > > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > > another issue.
> > > >
> > > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving to
> > > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > > >
> > > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC members"
> > > >
> > > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community members
> > > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst comes
> > > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > > a new or modified PMC".
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > > members joining the PMC.
> > > >
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26 contributors in
> > > > > 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite growing
> > > > > downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for jclouds-core
> > > > > alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk and we
> > > > > will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the project
> > > > > must move to the Apache attic.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > > >
> > > > > If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the project.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > > http://gaul.org/
> > 
> > -- 
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/
> > 
> 

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Hello Andrew,

I tried to reply to this thread but messed up the address (wrote "user@"), however I did send the same email to dev@, see [1]. 

We in Apache Brooklyn would certainly be unhappy to see Jclouds move to the attic. I have thought about it over the weekend and decided I would be willing to offer to join the Jclouds PMC if that will be helpful [2]. I see that Francois Papon (fpapon) has also volunteered [3], and JB is willing to continue [4].

I do agree a formal [VOTE] email would be of value. Personally I would like to see Jclouds successfully avoid the attic.

Kind regards
Geoff Macartney

[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/9rlpdc5v9q2tpjcmk6bbxgf74pwkdgxy
[2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/qjxrflzts889g0m5gj2ny2493q6xm9sp
[3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/gv5g27c7qbx9rrd59fddcys5h5rckfzm
[4] https://lists.apache.org/thread/cbp9wmzvlgqnpqc1b5rr30c33t7trc74

On 2022/11/10 12:21:08 Andrew Gaul wrote:
> I will send out a formal [VOTE] after I run the potentially final 2.6.0
> release.  Note that no one from the community, including anyone from the
> Brooklyn project, volunteered to help maintain jclouds after a month's
> notice.  I agree that this is an reversible situation but asking more
> from the existing maintainers is unlikely to succeed.
> 
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 09:00:57PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> > Oops, fixing address for user@jclouds.apache.org.
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 20:57, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> > >
> > > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed it
> > > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> > >
> > > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn if
> > > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > > another issue.
> > >
> > > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving to
> > > the Attic [1]. These note that
> > >
> > > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC members"
> > >
> > > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community members
> > > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst comes
> > > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > > a new or modified PMC".
> > >
> > > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > > members joining the PMC.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26 contributors in
> > > > 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite growing
> > > > downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for jclouds-core
> > > > alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk and we
> > > > will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the project
> > > > must move to the Apache attic.
> > > >
> > > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > > >
> > > > If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the project.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andrew Gaul
> > > > http://gaul.org/
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/
> 

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

I will send out a formal [VOTE] after I run the potentially final 2.6.0
release.  Note that no one from the community, including anyone from the
Brooklyn project, volunteered to help maintain jclouds after a month's
notice.  I agree that this is an reversible situation but asking more
from the existing maintainers is unlikely to succeed.

On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 09:00:57PM +0000, Geoff Macartney wrote:
> Oops, fixing address for user@jclouds.apache.org.
> 
> 
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 20:57, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
> >
> > I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed it
> > when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
> >
> > Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> > sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> > dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn if
> > Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> > implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> > another issue.
> >
> > I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving to
> > the Attic [1]. These note that
> >
> > "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> > lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC members"
> >
> > (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community members
> > to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst comes
> > to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> > a new or modified PMC".
> >
> > Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> > PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> > continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> > explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> > members joining the PMC.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Geoff
> >
> > [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26 contributors in
> > > 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite growing
> > > downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for jclouds-core
> > > alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk and we
> > > will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the project
> > > must move to the Apache attic.
> > >
> > > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> > >
> > > If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the project.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Gaul
> > > http://gaul.org/

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/

Re: move jclouds to the attic?

[Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org>]

Oops, fixing address for user@jclouds.apache.org.


On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 20:57, Geoff Macartney <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hello Andrew, and Jclouds PMC,
>
> I'm sorry to be so late in replying to this, I confess I had missed it
> when it was sent last month and only became aware of it today.
>
> Speaking as a member of the Apache Brooklyn PMC I must confess I am
> sad to hear this proposal. Jclouds is one of our most critical
> dependencies, and I would worry about the implications for Brooklyn if
> Jclouds moved to the Attic. I am worried in any case about the
> implications of the lower activity in the community, but that is
> another issue.
>
> I have been refreshing my memory about the PMC guidelines on moving to
> the Attic [1]. These note that
>
> "In summary, the only reason for a project to move to the Attic is
> lack of oversight due to an insufficient number of active PMC members"
>
> (the minimum being three), and that electing willing community members
> to the PMC would be the best way to keep it viable. If the worst comes
> to the worst "the Board can "reboot" a PMC by re-establishing it with
> a new or modified PMC".
>
> Perhaps it would be worth doing a formal [VOTE] poll within Jclouds
> PMC itself to see if at least three PMC members would be willing to
> continue to carry out that role? If not, maybe other options could be
> explored before deciding to move to the Attic, such as some community
> members joining the PMC.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Kind regards
> Geoff
>
> [1] https://apache.org/dev/pmc#move-to-attic
>
>
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 14:03, Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26 contributors in
> > 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022.  This is despite growing
> > downloads over the last 12 months from 50,000 to 80,000 for jclouds-core
> > alone.  Unfortunately the number of active committers has shrunk and we
> > will soon lack quorum for future releases.  This means that the project
> > must move to the Apache attic.
> >
> > Ideally the community could step up to sustain the project, e.g.,
> > reviewing pull requests, fixing issues, responding to mailing list
> > queries, and eventually becoming committers themselves.  Does anyone
> > have a multi-year interest in jclouds that wants to help out?
> >
> > If not, I will cut a final 2.6.0 release before retiring the project.
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/